Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.

1. Baljit Singh Judgment debtor has filed this revision petition, challenging the impugned order dated 22.09.2008 (Annexure P-2), passed by the executing Court whereby his objections have been dismissed.

2. As per the averments made in this petition, civil suit No. 141 of 26.03.2003, filed by the respondent for possession by way of specific performance of the agreement dated 6.6.2002 of the suit property detailed as 3 kanal 16 marla being 1/5 share out of 19 kanal comprised in khewat khatoni No. 149/160, Khasra Nos. 44//22/2, 23/2, 48//3 as per jamabandi for the year 1996-97 of village Tunga Heri, Tehsil Raikot, District Ludhiana and a plot measuring 0-11 k.m. being 1/3 share out of 1 kanal 14 marla Khewat No. 1335, Khatoni No. 1382, Khasra No. 531 and Khewat No. 1470, Khatoni No. 1517 Khasra No. 582 and 581/1/1 as per jamabandi for the year 1997-98 of village Barundi, Tehsil Raikot, District Ludhiana was decreed by the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana, vide her judgment and decree dated 1.2.2007 and the petitioner was directed to execute the sale-deed of the suit land in favour of the plaintiff-respondent within 3 months on deposit of balance sale consideration.

3. Plaintiff-respondent/Decree Holder filed execution application, in which notice was issued to the petitioner, who filed his objections vide Annexure P-1, which were dismissed by the executing Court vide impugned order dated 22.09.98 Annexure P-2.

4. Challenging the aforesaid order, learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the petitioner had specifically taken objections to the effect that he does not own any other house or land except the subject-matter of the execution and the same can neither be attached nor sold under the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure. However, while dismissing his objections argument of the petitioner has not been considered in this regard and therefore the impugned order dated 22.09.98 is liable to be set aside.

5. Relying upon documents Annexures P-1 to P-9, the petitioner has sought to raise the argument that the property sought to be attached and sold in execution is liable to be exempted under clause (ccc) as inserted by the Punjab Amendment of proviso to Section 60(i) of C.P.C., being the only residential house of the petitioner.

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

7. It is useful to reproduce relevant part of Sections 51 and 60 (as amended in the State of Punjab) of the C.P.C. which are as under :

"Section 51 : Powers of Court to enforce execution - Subject to such conditions and limitations as may be prescribed, the Court may, on the application of to decree-holder, order execution of the decree - "(a) by delivery of any property specifically decreed.

(b) by attachment and sale or by sale without attachment of any property.

(c) to (e) xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx "

Section 60 : Property liable to attachment and sale in execution of decree.- (1) The following property is liable to attachment and sale in execution of a decree, namely, lands, houses or other buildings, goods, money, bank-notes, cheques, bills of exchange, hundis, promissory notes, Government securities, bonds or other securities for money, debts, shares in a corporation and, save as hereinafter mentioned, all other saleable property, moveable or immovable, belonging to the judgment-debtor, or over which, or the profits of which, he has a disposing power which he may exercise for his own benefit, whether the same be held in the name of the judgment-debtor or by another person in trust for him or on his behalf : Provided that the following particulars (properties ?) shall not be liable to such attachment or sale, namely : "(a) to (cc) xxx xxx xxx

(ccc) one main residential house and other buildings attached to it (with the material and the sites thereof and the land immediately appurtenant thereto and necessary for their enjoyment) belonging to a judgment-debtor other than an agriculturist and