As per the case facts, respondents filed an objection under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), arguing that an execution decree was unenforceable. The Executing Court ... upheld this objection, leading to the dismissal of the execution application. Appellants then filed a revision, which resulted in the objection being dismissed and the execution proceeding being directed to continue. The respondents challenged this revisional order in the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution. The High Court quashed the revisional order and directed the parties to resolve their property rights in an appropriate forum. This appeal to the Supreme Court challenged the High Court's judgment. The question arose whether the High Court correctly quashed the revisional court's order and redirected the parties to a new adjudication of their rights concerning the decree's enforceability. Finally, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the High Court's decision. The Court agreed that the High Court was right to not directly rule on the decree's executability and that all disputes regarding property title, sale deed validity, and other contentious issues should be decided by a competent forum if approached. The previously appointed Court Receiver was also discharged.