1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision:04.02.2026 Happy Gupta ...Petitioner Versus Dushyant and Others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARMOD GOYAL Present: Ms. R.K. Grewal, Advocate with Mr. Dilsahib Singh, Advocate for petitioner.

***

PARMOD GOYAL, J. (ORAL)

Petitioner-decree holder is aggrieved by order dated 31.10.2025 (Annexure P-3) vide which execution petition was dismissed holding that judgment and decree dated 27.02.2025 (Annexure P-2) stands fully satisfied and the possession being claimed by petitioner-decree holder is beyond decree and cannot be allowed under the decree.

2. Admittedly, petitioner-decree holder had filed a suit for possession of a portion of house No.476 shown in red in the attached site plan against defendant Nos.1 and 2. The said suit filed on 17.11.2020 titled as ‘Happy Gupta versus Dushyant and Others’ was decreed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Moga, Punjab vide judgment and decree dated

27.02.2025. Relief granted to plaintiff is reproduced as under:- “In view of above discussion suit of plaintiff succeeds and same is decreed. Defendant No.1 and 2 are directed to hand over the portion of house No.476 as shown red in the site plan attached and fully detailed in the head note, within two months. Further defendants are restrained from changing the nature of house, dismantling and damaging the same, illegality and unlawfully till the possession is handed over to the plaintiff. Decree sheet be prepared and file be consigned to the Record Room Moga.”

3. Thereafter, petitioner-decree holder had preferred an execution petition and in pursuance of said execution petition, possession of portion marked with red colour was duly delivered to petitioner-decree holder as per order of Executing Court. After delivery of red portion, petitioner-decree holder had sought possession of green portion also on the ground that subsequent to passing of decree the judgment debtors had shifted to green portion while vacating red portion which was earlier in possession of plaintiff-decree holder. Accordingly, petitioner-decree holder has sought possession of green portion in pursuance of judgment and decree dated

27.02.2025.

4. Learned Executing Court, after considering arguments raised on behalf of petitioner-decree holder, concluded that it cannot go beyond the decree. The mandate of judgment and decree dated 27.02.2025 was as regards the possession of portion marked in red colour and since same has been delivered, therefore, the decree stands satisfied and no further possession of portion marked in green colour can be ordered as same was not ordered vide judgment and decree dated 27.02.2025.

5. On consideration, I do not find any error in the approach of learned Executing Court. Learned Executing Court has rightly concluded that it could not have gone beyond decree which only permits delivery of possession of portion marked in red colour and since possession of red portion has already been delivered to petitioner-decree holder, therefore, judgment and decree dated 27.02.2025 stood fully satisfied. As far as fact that judgment debtors have taken over green portion which was earlier in possession of petitioner-decree holder, the said alleged act is a fresh cause of action against which petitioner-decree holder is free to take legal re-course in accordance with law. No fault with impugned order is made out. Same is affirmed.

6. In view of above, revision petition is dismissed. 7. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

(PARMOD GOYAL)

JUDGE

04.02.2026

Sunil Chander