Judgment :- 1. Animadverting upon the order dated 23.06.2011 passed by the learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Erode in E.A.No.277 of 2011 in E.P.No.95 of 2010, this civil revision petition is focussed. 2. The parties are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status and ranking before the lower Court. 3. A thumb nail sketch of the germane facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of this revision would run thus: This revision is focussed as against the order dated 23.06.2011 on the ground that the lower Court ignoring the fact that already a substantial amount was paid by the judgment debtors to the decree holder, simply adjourned the sale with a condition that a sum of Rs.25,000/- should be deposited by 28.07.2011. 4. Heard both. 5. Ex facie and prima facie, this revision is not maintainable. A mortgage final decree could be executed by the decree holder without any hindrance. In this case, the Bank after obtaining preliminary and final decrees, is proceeding with the E.P. and the matter had been brought for sale and in that situation, invoking Order 21 Rule 69 read with Section 151 of CPC, a petition was filed by the judgment debtors seeking adjournment of sale by paying a sum of Rs.5,000/-; whereupon the Court passed the order, the operative portion of it would run thus: "2. Heard. Perused. Part satisfaction for Rs.5000/- recorded. Petition allowed on condition that the petitioner shall pay not less than Rs.25,000/- for next adjournment of sale, Sale adjourned to 28.7.11." 6. Challenging and impugning the said order, this revision is focussed. The scope of revision is so clear that orders of this nature cannot be challenged in the revision. Order 21 Rule 69 of CPC is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of this case, because the decree is passed in this case based on mortgage. I recollect the maxim: Parum est latam esse sententiam, nisi mandetur executioni – It is not enough that judgment has been given, if it is not committed to execution. Order 21 Rule 69 of CPC is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of this case, because the decree is passed in this case based on mortgage. I recollect the maxim: Parum est latam esse sententiam, nisi mandetur executioni – It is not enough that judgment has been given, if it is not committed to execution. Accordingly here, the lower Court in stricto sensu executing the decree and in that process, the judgment debtors without having any right in their favour, simply filed that application under Order 21 Rule 69 of CPC and got the merciful order and now they challenge as though that order was an unjust order, which cannot be entertained in the revision and no more elaboration in this regard is required. Accordingly, this civil revision petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.