2025:HHC:38077 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Civil Revision No.44 of 2025 Decided on: 12.11.2025 ____________________________________________________ Dinesh and another ……….. petitioners Versus Durga and others ……….respondents ____________________________________________________ Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the petitioners : Mr. G.R. Palsra, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Sanjeev Kuthiala, Sr. Advocate, with Ms. Tamanna Sharma and Ms. Sana Rana, Advocates, for respondent No.1. : Notice to respondents No. 2 to 6 not issued.: ____________________________________________________ Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral) The present petition has been preferred against the impugned order dated 09.05.2025, whereby after a perusal of the Local Commissioner’s report, the impugned order had been passed. 2. Heard counsel for the parties. Perused the record. 3. The claim as per the decree sheet in the case at hand reads as follows:- “Suit for declaration and consequential relief in respect of house comprising in Khata/Khatauni No. 420/491, Khasra 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 No. 157, 158 measuring 90-82 sq mtr, Muhal Mangween, Mandi, District Mandi H.P. 4. The decree passed in the case at hand is as follow:- It is ordered that the suit of the plaintiff is decreed to the effect that the Will dated 12.12.1988 is a valid and genuine registered Will and the Will dated 15.3.1992 is forged and fictitious Will and the plaintiffs are entitled to the possession of the suit property. However, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own costs. 5. From the aforesaid, it is evident that the claim in the suit was only with respect to Khasra Nos. 157 & 158. The only grievance canvassed by the present petitioner/JD is that insofar as the impugned order dated 9.5.2025 is concerned, directions have been issued by the Executing Court in excess of the decree so passed. The relevant portion of the impugned order has been reproduced here-in-after:- “However, the Court hereby upon going through the demarcation report and the photographs appended herewith issues the warrant of possession qua Khasra No. 157 and 158 and for carrying out the necessary raising of the wall for parting Khasra No.160 and 158 belonging to JD at his own expenses on the spot for which the necessary directions hereby given to the Tehsildar to handover the possession thereof to the parties in accordance with law and terms of the decree and the order passed by this Court and report be called for 31.5.2025.” 6. Admittedly, from a perusal of the relevant extract of the impugned order, it is evident that the Executing Court has passed directions qua Khasra No.160, which was not a subject matter of the dispute inter se the parties. 7. In view of the aforesaid, it is made clear that the warrant of possession only qua Khasra Nos. 157 and 158 shall be 3 executed, and the possession of the aforesaid Khasra numbers be handed over as per the demarcation report dated 24.04.2025. 8. The present petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms, so also, the pending miscellaneous applications, if any. (Bipin Chander Negi) Judge 12th November 2025 tarun