- (1.) This revision is directed against the order of Civil Judge, Hanumangarh dated 7. 11. 1986 whereby the learned Civil Judge rejected the petitioner's execution application.
(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the decree holder filed a suit for specific performance of contract for sale of agricultural land against deceased Umar Khan and Smt. Bismillah, which was decreed. The learned Civil Judge, Hanumangarh vide judgment and decree dated 31-5-1973 directed the non-petitioners to apply to the Collector, seeking permission for selling the disputed land and after obtaining such permission the petitioner will pay to Umar Khan or deposit in court the balance consideration of Rs. 4050/- within two months. Thereupon Umar Khan and Smt. Bismillah will execute sale deed in favour of the petitioner, and get it registered. It was also directed that if they fail to do so. the petitioner will get it registered through court and in case the Collector refuses the per mission, the petitioner will get Rs. 3,600/- from Shri Umar Khan. Against this judgment and decree, appeal was preferred but the same was dismissed On 16-8-74. The application for seeking permission was refused by the Collector vide order dated 17-7-1981 and thereafter Umarkhan made an application before the executing court stating that as the permission was refused, the decree can be satisfied only by depositing Rs. 3,600/ -. The Executing Court on 19-11-1983 ordered that if the judgment debtor pay Rs. 3,600/- to the decree holder or deposit the said a mount within one month then the decree passed against him would stand satisfied. The judgment debtor deposited Rs. 3,600/- in court but the petitioner has not withdrawn the said amount. The petitioner filed an application on 31-12-1982 before the Collector seeking review of his order dated 17-7-81 but the same was rejected later on heirs of deceased Umar Khan sought permission to sell the land in dispute and this time collector granted permission vide order dated 3-3-1986. The petitioner filed execution petition of the decree dated 31-5-1973. The non-petitioners filed objection u/sec. 47 CPC inter alia stating that the execution was time barred and also stated that the decree stands satisfied in view of the earlier order dated 19-11- 1983. The learned Civil Judge accepted the objection on 7-11-1986 and rejected the petitioner's execution petition. Hence this revision. I have heard Mr. Rajendra Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R. K. Singhal, learned counsel for the respondent. Mr. Mehta, learned; counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the order dated 19-11-1983 is no order in the eye of law and further stated that simply because the court has ordered to deposit Rs. 3,600/-, the decree could not be satisfied. On the other hand Mr. Singhal, Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that when permission was refused, then in terms of decree there was option except to deposit the advance money in the order and as per order of the Executing Court, he has deposited the amount and by not withdrawing the same it would not be said that the decree has not been satisfied. Admittedly, in the present case the execution petition was filed on 29-7-1986 for the judgment and decree passed in suit no. 32/70 on 31-5-1973 i. e. after about 13 years. The money was deposited in terms of the decree as per the order of executing court, if the petitioner has not withdrawn this amount then it is his fault, as once decree is satisfied and subsequently the permission being granted to the heirs of judgment debtor Umar Khan, the decree holder cannot agitate the same in execution petition, alleging that decree is not satisfied. As such the trial court has not acted illegally in exercise of its jurisdiction and with material irregularity. The trial court has rightly observed that the decree holder can file a fresh suit if so advised. In view of the above facts and circumstances, no interference is called for.
(3.) In the result, this revision petition has no force so it is hereby dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.;