IN TH 208 Raj Kuma Charanjit CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GU ordinate Be Civil Revision No.8246 of 2025 (O & IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR Civil Revision N Date of decision Kumar and another Versus ranjit Singh and others AM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NI Mr. Sunny K. Singla, Advocat for the petitioners. Mr. Akshat Kalia, Advocate fo HI GUPTA J. (Oral) On 14.11.2025, the following ate Bench of this Court :- “Petitioners he Judgment-Debtors in E They assail the order d the Executing Court possession have been direction to provide the Learned counse order was passed agai Kimti Lal on 26.09.2 Section 13 of the E Restriction Act. The was dismissed by the A stay was granted by t which is pending. O & M) 1 UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH ion No.8246 of 2025 (O & M) cision :-28.04.2026 …..Petitioners …..Respondents E NIDHI GUPTA dvocate cate for respondent No.1. owing order was passed by a co- herein are two of the in Execution No.244 of 2022. er dated 18.10.2025 passed by ourt, whereby warrants of been issued with the further the necessary Police Aid. unsel submits that ejectment against the petitioners and one .09.2018 in a petition under e East Punjab Urban Rent he appeal against that order the Appellate Authority and no by this Court in the revision, VIJAY ASIJA 2026.04.29 12.06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document stay of imp order dated the co-ordi petition is Civil Revision No.8246 of 2025 (O & In the meantime, by the landlord le. wherein objections ha on 19.09.2025. Reply t filed by the decree-hol case was adjourned to 3 However, on the 30.09.2025, the decr execution on account of on between the parties case compromise is n order is Annexure P-2. drawn attention toward P-3, which was moved b revival of the executi after taking the report o issued the warrants of impugned order and notice to the petitioner of the objections which the petitioner-tenant. Notice of motion holder only at this stage In the meantime, order dated 18.10.20 remain stayed.” Learned counsel for respond of impugned order was granted by t r dated 14.11.2025 as the complete fa ordinate Bench. It is submitted that in actual ion is not maintainable as even prio O & M) 2 ime, execution petition was filed le. respondent No.1 herein, had been filed by the tenants ply to the said objections were holder on 29.09.2025 and the to 30.09.2025 for arguments. the next date of hearing i.e. decree holder withdrew the nt of talks of compromise going rties with liberty to revive, in is not effected. Copy of that 2. Learned counsel has then ards the application Annexure ved by the decree-holder for the cution. The Executing Court, ort of the Ahlmad, straight-way s of possession by passing the nd without even issuing any ners or without even disposing hich had been earlier filed by tion to respondent No.1/decree- stage for 10.12.2025. ime, operation of the impugned 0.2025 (Annexure P-5) shall spondent No.1 submits that the d by the co-ordinate Bench vide lete facts were not stated before actual fact the present revision n prior to filing of the present VIJAY ASIJA 2026.04.29 12.06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document revision pe respondent satisfied v Copy of record. submission possession the order d “…the Exe Accordingl possession controverte petition sta April 28, 2 Vijay Asija Whether spea Whether Repo Civil Revision No.8246 of 2025 (O & ion petition on 3.11.2025, the execu ndent had been withdrawn by the fied vide order dated 01.11.2025 passe of the said order is handed over in Learned counsel for the p issions of learned counsel for respon ession of the suit property is still with t However, learned counsel for rder dated 01.11.2025, wherein, it is Execution is dismissed as withdr ingly, aforesaid application for sion stands infructuous….”. Heard. In view of the facts note roverted by learned counsel for th ion stands dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, , 2026 r speaking/reasoned Yes / No r Reportable Yes / No O & M) 3 execution petition filed by the y the respondent as being fully passed by the Executing Court. ver in Court, which is taken on the petitioners controverts the espondent No.1 and submits that l with the petitioners. sel for respondent No.1 refers to , it is categorically recorded that ithdrawn being fully satisfied. for recalling the warrants of noted above, which are not for the petitioners, the present if any, shall stand(s) disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2026.04.29 12.06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document