Swatanter Kumar, J.

1. In this revision petition order dated 2.6.1998 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Narnaul is impugned.

2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in view of the recent pronouncements of the Honble Supreme Court of India in the cases of Brahmdeo Choudhary v. Rishikesh Prasad Jaiswal and Anr., J.T. 1997(1) S.C. 641 and Silver line Forum Pvt. Ltd. v. Rajiv Trust and Anr., J.T. 1998(3) S.C. 1, the learned executing Court could not have dismissed the objections as not maintainable on the principles laid down in the case of Bank of Baroda v. R.M. Patwa and Anr., 1996(2) S.L.J. 1285. It is contended that the executing Court was obliged to conduct an enquiry and decide the objections on merits.

3. The submission raised on behalf of the petitioner at the face of it is misconceived. It is true that the Honble Apex Court in the recent judgments has taken a different view than what had been taken in the case of Bank of Barodas case (Supra). Now it is settled that a third party who was not a party to the suit proceedings can also file objections and the Court can entertain and decide the said objections even in exec