Mr. Paramjeet Singh, J.: - Instant revision petition has been filed by petitioner-wife/decree-holder for quashing the order dated 08.12.2005 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Sonepat, whereby the application under Sections 47 and 51 and Order 21 Rule 32 CPC read with provisions of Hindu Marriage Act (for short ‘HMA’) for recording satisfaction of the decree passed in favour of the petitioner, filed by respondent-husband/judgment-debtor, has been allowed.

2. The short questions involved in the present revision petition are as under: -

“1. Whether the decree under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) can be got executed by the judgment-debtor and consequential satisfaction of the decree for restitution of conjugal rights under Order 21 Rules 32 and 33 CPC can be recorded?

2. Whether in the present case recording of the decree as satisfied is perverse and not sustainable in the eyes of law?

3. Brief facts of the case are that petitioner – Smt. Maya Devi filed a petition under Section 9 of HMA for restitution of conjugal rights. The said petition was allowed on 10.01.2003 and a decree for restitution of conjugal rights was pas