##PAGE1##

252 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

ESA-24-2026 (O&M)

Date of Decision: March 25, 2026

HARWINDER SINGH ........Appellant

Versus

MOHAN SINGH AND OTHERS ......Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

Present: Mr. Anil Shukla, Advocate for the appellant.

****

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the

orders dated 21.08.2023 and 17.03.2026 passed by the Courts below whereby, the third party objections preferred at the instance of petitioner in an execution application filed by the decree-holder/Paramjit Singh

were dismissed.

2. Briefly stating, with respect to the subject property, decree- holder/Paramveer Singh filed an eviction petition against his tenant Narwinder Singh s/o Mohan Singh wherein an order of eviction was passed against the tenant. Based thereupon, the decree- holder/Paramveer Singh filed an execution application wherein petitioner filed objections while claiming himself to be the third party. It was averred in the objections that the subject property was rented out to him by Mohan Singh while acting on the instructions of the original owner namely, Paramveer Singh and since then, the petitioner invested certain

amount on its renovation etc.

TEJWINDER SINGH

2026.03.25 19:23 I agree to specified portions of this document

ESA-24-2026 (O&M) -2-

3. It was thus submitted that the petitioner was having independent right over the property in question and was not to be vacated and in terms of the eviction order dated 17.01.2018 and the possession of the demised premises was not to be handed over to the decree-holder/Paramveer Singh. The aforesaid objections were contested by the decree-holder/Paramveer Singh. The aforesaid objections filed at the instance of petitioner were dismissed vide order

dated 21.08.2023 by the learned Executing Court.

4. Aggrieved thereof, the first appeal was filed, however, the same was dismissed vide order dated 17.03.2026 passed by learned

Addl. District Judge, SAS Nagar.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and gone

through the paper-book.

6. In the present case, an eviction order dated 17.01.2018 was passed against the judgment-debtor/Narwinder Singh on an eviction petition preferred at the instance of decree-holder/Paramveer Singh. Later objections came to be filed at the instance of petitioner with the averment that the demised premises was rented out to him by Mohan Singh who acted on instructions of owner decree-holder/Paramveer Singh. However, neither any rent deed has been placed on record nor any rent receipt has been produced by the petitioner so as to even prima facie show any kind of rent agreement between him and the landlord/decree-holder/Paramveer Singh. Moreover, Mohan Singh

happened to be the father of judgment debtor-Narwinder Singh.

TEJWINDER SINGH

2026.03.25 19:23 I agree to specified portions of this document

ESA-24-2026 (O&M) -3-

7. In such circumstances, apparently, the objections preferred at the instance of petitioner appear to be merely a ploy to defeat the rights of the decree-holder/Paramveer Singh who is already awaiting the execution of the eviction order dated 17.01.2018 for the past more than 6 years. Moreover, the orders passed by the Courts below are based upon proper appreciation of evidence and the relevant material available on

record and as such, the same call for no interference.

8. Accordingly, the present revision petition being devoid of

merits is thus, dismissed.

9. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

25.03.2026 (HARKESH MANUJA)

Tejwinder JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No

Whether reportable Yes/No

TEJWINDER SINGH

2026.03.25 19:23 I agree to specified portions of this document