Judgment Puneet Gupta, J.—This civil revision has been filed against the impugned order dated 24.12.2019 in terms whereof the execution petition seeking enforcement and implementation of the judgment dated 14.11.2019 in civil original suit titled Sarah Binti Mehboob Vs. Registrar Birth and Deaths, Srinagar and anr., bearing file No.73/N passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Srinagar, has been dismissed. 2. The facts leading to the filing of instant revision petition as well as contempt petition in hand is that pursuant to notification issued by respondent No.2 inviting applications for admission in LKG class for the year 2019-20, petitioner (minor) herein through her father submitted the admission form alongwith requisite documents on 12.09.2019 under Registration No.1111. After completing the process of interaction, respondent No.2 issued a list of selected candidates wherein the name of petitioner also figured. Subsequently, the school authorities expressed their inability to receive the admission fee on account of discrepancy noticed in the photo-copy of birth certificate submitted along with application form wherein the date of birth in figures reflected as ‘05/11/2015’ whereas the date of birth in words shown as ‘Fifth November Two Thousand Sixteen’. That despite submitting the documents substantiating the date of birth of the petitioner-Sarah Binti Mehboob-as 05.11.2015, the school authorities declined to consider the same. The respondent No.1 filed a civil suit for redressal of grievance. On an application filed for grant of interim relief, the trial Court passed an interim order dated 23.10.2019 whereof respondent No.1 was directed to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner for issuance of duplicate date of birth certificate and respondent No.2 was directed to admit the petitioner-child on provisional basis subject to undertaking given by her father that in case she fails in the suit her admission would be cancelled. The respondent No.1 issued date of birth certificate reflecting the date of birth of the petitioner as 05.11.2015 both in words and in figures. However, respondent No.2 did not comply with the direction dated 23.10.2019, which prompted the petitioner to file contempt petition on 29.10.2019. The counsel for respondent No.2 made a statement before the trial Court that suit of the plaint be disposed of by giving a direction to respondent to admit the petitioner in their school in light of facts and circumstances of the case. The counsel for respondent No.2 made a statement before the trial Court that suit of the plaint be disposed of by giving a direction to respondent to admit the petitioner in their school in light of facts and circumstances of the case. The trial Court after noticing that date of birth certificate has been issued by Municipal Authorities showing date of birth of the petitioner as 05.11.2015 and upon submission made by counsel for respondent No.2, the court disposed of suit vide judgment dated 14.11.2019. 3. The respondent No.2 despite the final judgment dated 14.11.2019 did not implement the same and as a consequence thereof the petitioner filed contempt as well execution petition seeking enforcement and implementation of the judgment. In the said execution/contempt petition, respondent No.2 filed objections contending therein that the certificate submitted on behalf of the petitioner was forged/fake and same was a product of fraud, therefore, it was not open for the court to have passed the judgment. Respondent No.2 also filed an application seeking permission to place on record the order dated 16.12.2019 whereby selection/admission of the petitioner stood cancelled ab initio. The Court vide order dated 24.12.2019 was of the view that in the face of the cancellation of the admission having been ordered by the respondent No.2 the execution will not lie and that fresh cause of action is available to the petitioner for which the order of cancellation could be challenged in different proceedings. Feeling aggrieved of order dated 24.12.2019, petitioner has preferred the instant revision petition on the grounds mentioned therein. 4. The relevant extract of the judgment dated 14.11.2019, passed in suit, is reproduced below:- “Suit of the plaintiff is therefore disposed of with the direction that since the defendant No.1 has issued Date of Birth Certificate in accordance with law prevailing on the subject and given the admitted position that plaintiff figures in the Select List of LKG aspirants for the session 2019-20, defendant No.2 shall offer admission to the plaintiff by accepting the Date of Birth Certificate issued by defendant No.1. Suit of the plaintiff along with connected applications is therefore disposed of in the like manner. Copy of order shall be conveyed to defendant No.2 for information and necessary action at their end. Suit stands accordingly disposed of and be consigned to records.” 5. Suit of the plaintiff along with connected applications is therefore disposed of in the like manner. Copy of order shall be conveyed to defendant No.2 for information and necessary action at their end. Suit stands accordingly disposed of and be consigned to records.” 5. The concluding paragraph of the impugned order dated 24.12.2019 passed by the trial Court in the execution/contempt petition is as under:- “The reasons given in the cancellation order are to be appreciated in separate proceedings and there appears to be no prima-facie material on record of the file, to have shown that the non-applicant has wilfully disregarded the compliance of this court order dated 14.11.2019. There is thus no merit in the contempt petition which is accordingly dismissed. Since the order dated 14.11.2019 passed by this court has merged into the cancellation order dated 16.12.2019 passed by defendant No.2, the execution will also no lie, same too is also dismissed. Both applications be consigned to records. However, decree-holder is at liberty to challenge order dated 16.12.2019 before appropriate forum in accordance with law.” 6. Heard learned counsels and perused the file. 7. The admitted position in the case is that pursuant to notification issued by respondent No.2 inviting application for admission in LKG class for the year 2019-20, petitioner (minor) herein had submitted admission form along with requisite documents and her name also figured in the select list of candidates. The petitioner filed a suit as the respondent-school did not grant admission in the school. The suit filed by the petitioner/plaintiff came to be finally disposed of vide judgment dated 14.11.2019 with the directions mentioned above. The execution application and contempt application filed by the petitioner were dismissed by the order impugned in the present petition. 8. The issue which is under consideration and required to be determined is: if the executing court was justified in dismissing the execution/contempt application on the ground that in view of the order passed by the respondent No.2 on 16.12.2019 wherein the admission of the child was cancelled for the reasons stated in the same a fresh cause of action has arisen in favour of the plaintiff to challenge the same before the Court of law. 9. 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the executing court could not pass the impugned order so as to nullify its own judgment as the order of the cancellation of admission was passed by the respondent-school after the passing of the judgement. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-school has argued that in view of the order passed by the school vide dated 16.12.2019 executing court has passed the impugned order which is as per law and new cause of action, if any, has arisen in favour of the petitioner and she was at liberty to pursue the remedy available to her in accordance with law. 10. It is suffice to mention herein that the respondents felt satisfied with the judgment of the trial and had no grievance with the same and that is why the judgment was not challenged by them and the same attained finality. 11. There is no dispute that there was some discrepancy so far as the certificates issued by the Municipality regarding the Date of Birth of the child and that is why the suit came to be filed by the petitioner herein in the court of law. However, the issue regarding the Date of Birth of the child got settled in view of the judgment passed by the trial court. The respondent No.1 issued birth certificate of child during the course of the suit proceedings and on the basis of the same and the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2 before the trial court that there was no objection if the direction was issued to the school to admit the child in the school that the judgment came to be passed by the trial court. 12. It is also pertinent to mention herein that it is not the case of the respondent-school that the judgment could not be otherwise passed by the trial court with the directions as contained therein. The respondent No.2 could not wriggle itself out of the judgment passed by the trial court. The order dated 16.12.2019 passed by the respondents-school after passing of the judgement and during the course of execution/contempt proceedings was, to say the least, only a ploy and device to frustrate the judgment and its execution and nothing more. The respondent No.2 could not wriggle itself out of the judgment passed by the trial court. The order dated 16.12.2019 passed by the respondents-school after passing of the judgement and during the course of execution/contempt proceedings was, to say the least, only a ploy and device to frustrate the judgment and its execution and nothing more. The party to the suit may try to defeat the judgment passed against him by acting in such a manner so as to conveniently plead that the judgment passed by the court is not executable as the same has been done by the respondent-school through its order dated 16.12.2019. The plea taken in the execution proceedings by the respondent-school through its order dated 16.12.2019 was not available with the said respondent and the executing court dismissing the execution as well as contempt proceedings on the basis of said order and observing that a fresh cause of action has arisen after the passing of the aforesaid order by the respondent-school is not sustainable in the eyes of law. The judgment debtor is always at liberty to take all the pleas which may be available to him in the execution proceedings. However, the plea taken by the respondents-school on the strength of its order of 16.12.2019 was not available to the school authorities in the execution proceeding and the executing court could not dismiss the application on that ground. The respondent no.2 could not circumvent the judgment of the trial court in the manner it sought to do moreso when the respondent did accept the date of birth of the child issued by the respondent no.1 and consequent to the same the directions came to be passed to the respondent to admit the child in the school. The court got simply impressed by the order of cancellation of admission of the child and thus passed the order impugned. The reliance of the executing court on the order passed by the school authorities for dismissing the application is misplaced and does not stand the test of law. 13. In the light of the discussion made above, the present revision petition is allowed and order impugned is set-aside. The executing court is required to deal with the applications pending before it in which the impugned order came to be passed in accordance with law. 13. In the light of the discussion made above, the present revision petition is allowed and order impugned is set-aside. The executing court is required to deal with the applications pending before it in which the impugned order came to be passed in accordance with law. Indeed, the executing court will be at liberty to take into consideration any other objection which the respondents may have. 14. No further proceedings are required to be taken in the contempt petition filed in pursuance to the interim direction passed in the revision petition also stands disposed of. All connected applications in the Revision petition and the Contempt petition also stand disposed of. The parties shall appear before the concerned court on 29.03.2021.