RAJIVE BHALLA, J. - (1.) CHALLENGE in this revision petition is to the order, dated 22.11.2006, passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Karnal, dismissing objections, filed by the petitioner, praying for issuance of directions to the respondents to pay interest @ 18%, in accordance with directions, issued by this Court in CWP No. 7506 of 1990, in terms of the judgment, passed in CWP No. 1893 of 1989.
(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner submits that the learned executing Court committed an error in holding that it could travel beyond the decree, if the petitioner's prayer was accepted. It is submitted that the decree, under execution, is based, in essence, upon an order of this Court, directing the respondents to pay interest @ 18% till date. The learned executing Court, however, dismissed the objections, disregarding the aforementioned submissions. Counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that after the decision of the aforementioned writ petitions, Jaswant Rai, legal heir of Khushi Ram, the original allottee, along with other heirs, approached the petitioner for allotment. It, however, refused to allot the plot, compelling the respondents to file a civil suit, which was eventually decreed by directing the petitioner to allot a plot to the respondents. It is submitted that as the fault, if any, with respect to non-allotment of a plot lay with the petitioner, the respondents are not obliged to pay any interest. It is further submitted that the judgment and decree, under execution, does not provide for any interest and, therefore, the learned executing Court rightly dismissed the objections.
(3.) I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order.;