AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length in this revision. The grievance projected by the petitioner is that the exparte decree has
been passed by the court below, of which he had already applied for setting aside the same under the provisions of 09R13 of CPC and same is
pending before the Court below. The petitioner besides raising legal pleas has also factually stated that he had filed written statement in the main
suit, but same was not considered by the Court at the time of passing of the exparte decree etc. And in the meantime he had asked the court to
stay execution of the proceedings. But instead of staying execution proceedings, the Court had issued notice to other party to file objections and in
the meantime issued the directions to the bank to deposit the money with the Court. The learned counsel submits that as because his application for
stay of execution has been deferred. Notice has been sent to other party and Court has passed directions asking the bank to make money
available before Court. He apprehends that nothing has been left out to be agitated. The apprehension of Mr. Bhan are not sound. There is no
specific order passed by the Court below till today, whereby, the application for staying of proceedings has been rejected. The application for stay
of proceedings is still pending/under consideration before court below, for which objections have been sought from other party/ decree holder.
The grievance projected by Mr. Bhan is not legally sound because order in this revision has been passed by the court below in execution of
proceedings, which has been put to challange. The order impugned wherein objections have been sought and directions have been issued for
procurring of the amount from the bank, is not order passed in proceedings for stay of execution and order does not fall under the provisions of
section 47 of CPC. Because yet the Court has to pass the order regarding that. So merely giving direction to the bank that let amount be deposited
with the court in execution proceedings does not amount to rejection of the application for stay of execution, or stay of execution, or stay of
execution of decree, which is to be passed by the Court below. (SIC) He is seized of the case. However, while disposing the application of the
judgment debtor, the court is directed that he shall hear the parties regarding stay of execution and pass appropriate orders and shall not make any
order regarding payment of the amount which have been procurred by the bank to be deposited with the court. The court is also within its
competence to ask for security whatever is legally possible in terms on 021R25 CPC in execution proceedings/in proceedings for setting aside
exparte decree.
The Court will hear the parties and pass appropriate orders. Let records go back to the court below. Parties are directed to cause their
appearance before the Court below on 20.9.1997