CR No.4146 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 247-U BALJINDER SINGH BALJINDER SINGH BALJINDER SINGH BALJINDER SINGH Vs Vs Vs Vs GURJEET KAUR GURJEET KAUR GURJEET KAUR GURJEET KAUR CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ Present: Mr. for the petitioner Respondent in HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) [1]. By way of present order dated 16.07.2019 Nagar in EXE/1092/2017, whereby the objections preferred at the instance of the petitioner against the judgment and decree dated 20.04.2017 for recovery of a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- [2]. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper book. [3]. In the present case, a suit with interest was decree dated 20.04.2017 petitioner-husband, decision came to be judgment and decree dated 20.04.2017, the respondent petition in which objections (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH CR No.4146 of 2025 (O&M) CR No.4146 of 2025 (O&M) CR No.4146 of 2025 (O&M) CR No.4146 of 2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: BALJINDER SINGH BALJINDER SINGH BALJINDER SINGH BALJINDER SINGH ...... ...... ...... ...... GURJEET KAUR GURJEET KAUR GURJEET KAUR GURJEET KAUR ....Respondent ....Respondent ....Respondent ....Respondent HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ Mr. Surinder Mohan Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Respondent in-person. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) By way of present revision petition, challenge has been laid to 16.07.2019 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) SAS Nagar in EXE/1092/2017, whereby the objections preferred at the instance of the against the judgment and decree dated 20.04.2017 for recovery of a sum - passed in favour of the respondent I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the In the present case, a suit for recovery with interest was decreed in favour of the respondent decree dated 20.04.2017. Though an appeal was preferred at the instance of the husband, which was dismissed being barred by limitation and the said came to be assailed before this Court judgment and decree dated 20.04.2017, the respondent petition in which objections were preferred at the instance of the petitioner IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH CR No.4146 of 2025 (O&M) CR No.4146 of 2025 (O&M) CR No.4146 of 2025 (O&M) CR No.4146 of 2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision:25 25 25 25....00005555.202 .202 .202 .2026666 ...... ...... ...... ......Petitioner Petitioner Petitioner Petitionerssss ....Respondent ....Respondent ....Respondent ....Respondentssss HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJAAAA , Advocate petition, challenge has been laid to learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) SAS Nagar in EXE/1092/2017, whereby the objections preferred at the instance of the against the judgment and decree dated 20.04.2017 for recovery of a sum passed in favour of the respondent-wife, has been dismissed. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the recovery of a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- along decreed in favour of the respondent-wife vide judgment and Though an appeal was preferred at the instance of the dismissed being barred by limitation and the said assailed before this Court. In the meanwhile, based on the judgment and decree dated 20.04.2017, the respondent-wife filed execution preferred at the instance of the petitioner 1 petition, challenge has been laid to the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) SAS Nagar in EXE/1092/2017, whereby the objections preferred at the instance of the against the judgment and decree dated 20.04.2017 for recovery of a sum I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the along udgment and Though an appeal was preferred at the instance of the dismissed being barred by limitation and the said based on the wife filed execution preferred at the instance of the petitioner- MOHMED ATIK 2026.05.27 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CR No.4146 of 2025 husband, which were declined vide the impugned order. Hence the present revision petition. [4]. The petitioner/judgment obtained by the respondent material particulars in this regard ha learned Executing Court nor even before this Court. [5]. In such circumstances, impugned order passed by the learned Executing Court whereby the objections preferred at the instance of the petitioner/judgment such, finding no merit in the present case, the same is thus, dismissed. [6]. At this stage, it may be noticed here that in terms of the order dated 01.08.2025, a sum of Rs.2,00,000 Registrar General of this Court and the same was ordered to be converted into an FDR. The said deposit/FDR be forwarded to the learned Executing Court and be disbursed in favour of the resp [7]. Pending application(s), if any shall also stand disposed of. May May May May 25 25 25 25, 202 , 202 , 202 , 2026666 Atik Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable (O&M) husband, which were declined vide the impugned order. Hence the present revision The only material objection raised on behalf of the petitioner/judgment-debtor is that the judgment and decree dated 20.04.2017 was obtained by the respondent-wife by misleading material particulars in this regard have been brought on record neither before the learned Executing Court nor even before this Court. In such circumstances, no illegality or perversity can be found in the impugned order passed by the learned Executing Court whereby the objections rred at the instance of the petitioner/judgment such, finding no merit in the present case, the same is thus, dismissed. At this stage, it may be noticed here that in terms of the order dated 01.08.2025, a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- was deposited by the petitioner with the Registrar General of this Court and the same was ordered to be converted into an FDR. The said deposit/FDR be forwarded to the learned Executing Court and be disbursed in favour of the respondent-wife/decree Pending application(s), if any shall also stand disposed of. Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No husband, which were declined vide the impugned order. Hence the present revision only material objection raised on behalf of the debtor is that the judgment and decree dated 20.04.2017 was the Court concerned. However, no ve been brought on record neither before the learned Executing Court nor even before this Court. no illegality or perversity can be found in the impugned order passed by the learned Executing Court whereby the objections rred at the instance of the petitioner/judgment-debtor were dismissed. such, finding no merit in the present case, the same is thus, dismissed. At this stage, it may be noticed here that in terms of the order dated was deposited by the petitioner with the Registrar General of this Court and the same was ordered to be converted into an FDR. The said deposit/FDR be forwarded to the learned Executing Court and be wife/decree-holder at the earliest. Pending application(s), if any shall also stand disposed of. (HARKESH MANUJA) (HARKESH MANUJA) (HARKESH MANUJA) (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No 2 husband, which were declined vide the impugned order. Hence the present revision only material objection raised on behalf of the debtor is that the judgment and decree dated 20.04.2017 was the Court concerned. However, no ve been brought on record neither before the no illegality or perversity can be found in the impugned order passed by the learned Executing Court whereby the objections As At this stage, it may be noticed here that in terms of the order dated was deposited by the petitioner with the Registrar General of this Court and the same was ordered to be converted into an FDR. The said deposit/FDR be forwarded to the learned Executing Court and be MOHMED ATIK 2026.05.27 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment