Laxmi vs Lajwanti & Ors.

Hemant Gupta, J.

The challenge in the present revision petition is to the order passed by the learned Executing Court on 26.7.2003, whereby the objections raised by the petitioner that the property in dispute cannot be attached and sold in execution of the decree, being her selfacquired property, was dismissed.

A decree for possession and that of mesne profits was passed against Risal Singh and others on 2.4.1997. The said Risal Singh has since died and the petitioner is one of his legal representatives. Though the decree for possession has been executed, but the question remains regarding the decree for mesne profits. It is the case of the petitioner that the property sought to be attached is in fact, selfacquired property of the petitioner, having been purchased by a registered sale deed on 17.12.1992, therefore, such decree cannot be executed against her selfacquired property. The said decree can be executed only against the property of her husband, who is the judgmentdebtor.

The learned Executing Court found that such objection cannot be entertained at this stage as the Court cannot go behind the decree and ordered the auction of the property of the judgmentdebtor. However, I am of the opinion that said order cannot be sustained. All objections arising out of the execution of the decree are required to be gone into by the Executing Court. The objection that the property cannot be attached and sold in execution of the decree passed against the judgmentdebtor against the property of the petitioner is a question, which is required to be determined by the Executing Court.

Therefore, the impugned order dated 26.7.2003 passed by the learned Executing Court, is set aside and the learned Executing Court is directed to decide the objections by permitting the parties to lead evidence, in accordance with law.

The present revision petition stands allowed in the above terms.