NO.3-A of 4.1.1990 for possession in the Court of Sub Judge 1st Class, Sangrur in respect of this land. In the aforesaid suit, the Society was not impleaded as a party. The suit was filed against the Union of India, State of Punjab and Municipal Committee, Longowal. The suit was decreed exparte vide judgment and decree dated 30.5.1995. It has come in the judgment passed by the Civil Court that the possession of the land is with the Navodaya Vidayalaya, Longowal. Despite this fact having come on the record of the court, the plaintiff chose not to implead the Navodaya Vidayalaya as party-defendant in the suit and obtained an ex-parte decree. While the decree was being executed, the petitioner-society filed an application primarily under Order 21 rules 97 to 99 CPC objecting to the execution and taking possession from the society in respect of the land measuring 153 kanals 18 marls. This application has been rejected by the executing court vide the impugned order dated 4.2.1998. The trial court has observed that the Municipal Committee was not competent to transfer the land to the Navodaya Vidayalya, Longowal. It has also been held that court is under no obligation to frame issue in every case. The Court, however, held that if the Objector considers the judgment-debtor no.1 as its parent body, then decree has attained finality and the petitioner has no locus and if he considers his position to be that of third party, then before raising the objection, he will have to surrender the possession. These observations have been made by the executing court without any basis and on mis-construction of the facts on record. It is admitted case of the petitioner and even noticed in the impugned order that the petitioner is a Society registered under the Societies Act. It is thus an independent body and not a department of judgment debtor no.1 i.e. Union of India. Under
