1)You should in your arguments rely upon contents of the release deed 

2)document speaks for itself 

3) court will disregard the contentions raised by JdR as he is unable to substainate his claim 

4) Since the JDR is intentionally making false statements on oath/affidavit regarding ownership despite being served with a registered release deed, you can file an application under Section 340 read with Section 195 of the CRPC 

5) Executing Court must dispose of the EP within six months from filing. Any extension requires the judge to record reasons in writing.

You can file the said application and seek action also can highlight the same before the court everytime he files false claim

Your concern is valid, but you need to proceed strategically and not over-aggressively, otherwise the court may treat it as unnecessary escalation.

First, merely wrong reading or misinterpretation of a registered document by an advocate, even if deliberate, does not automatically attract action under Section 340 Cr.P.C. Section 340 is invoked only when there is clear, deliberate false evidence on oath or fabrication of documents affecting administration of justice. Courts apply this provision very strictly.

In your case, the stronger and more effective remedies are within the execution proceedings itself:

You should immediately file a detailed written objection/rejoinder in the execution petition clearly demonstrating:

• The correct interpretation of the registered release deed
• That the JDR has acquired 50% share through release by his wife
• That the claim now taken is contrary to a registered document

Annex the certified copy of the release deed and highlight the specific clauses.

Further, press the court to:

• Reject the objections under Order 21 Rule 54 CPC as frivolous and unsupported by any document
• Impose costs for false and vexatious objections
• Record that the objections are only to delay execution

You can also rely on recent Supreme Court guidelines emphasizing expeditious disposal of execution proceedings and discouraging dilatory tactics.

If the false claim is being made on affidavit (sworn pleadings), then as a second step, you may consider:

• Filing an application seeking initiation of perjury proceedings, but only if there is a clear contradiction with documentary evidence

Section 340 Cr.P.C. should be used cautiously and as a last resort, because:

• Courts avoid converting execution proceedings into criminal litigation
• It may delay your own execution

A more practical pressure tactic is:

• Seek heavy costs
• Seek early disposal directions
• Press for attachment to proceed without being stalled by baseless objections

In summary, your best course is:

• Counter the false claim with documentary clarity
• Get the objections dismissed with costs
• Push for execution to proceed
• Use perjury route only if false statements are on oath and clearly provable

This approach is faster, more effective, and aligned with how execution courts function.

You can clearly highlight before the court that it is a registered release deed and that the misreading of the releaser Vs. releasee is not accidental but deliberate with intentions malafide , hence seek to dismiss the objections as frivolous and vexatious. 

You may invoke Invoke Order 21 Rule 58 / 97 CPC if JDR is indirectly disputing the title, you may argue that the Execution court cannot permit vague ownership claims without proof and the burden is entirely on JDR to prove his false claim. 

You may file a contempt petition only if it is a clear false statement on oath / affidavit and not just arguments by advocate. 

If the advocate is knowingly misrepresenting a registered document you may consider filing a  complaint before
Bar Council of India (or State Bar Council), but, use this only if conduct is clearly unethical and documented and not for normal adversarial arguments.