S VENKATARAMANASWAMY Vs. H T RAMAKRISHNAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this revision the petitioner has challenged the order dated 6-2-1992 passed by the Additional Second Munsiff, Bangalore District, Bangalore on LA. No. II. By the said order, the learned Munsiff allowed LA. No. II by staying the execution proceedings in Ex. No. 69 of 1991 pending disposal of the suit at O.S. No. 222 of 1986 and O.S. No. 286 of 1990.

(2.) The facts relevant for the disposal of this revision petition,briefly stated, are as under: The instant revision petitioner had obtained an order of eviction in HRC No. 1 of 1987 against the instant respondent. He had put that order in Execution Case No. 69 of 1991 on the file of the Additional Second Munsiff, Bangalore District, Bangalore.

(3.) During the pendency of the said execution proceedings, thejudgment-debtor (present respondent) filed an application at LA. II purporting to be one under Order 21, Rule 29, CPC praying for staying the execution proceedings. Among other things, it was alleged by the judgment-debtor that the decree-holder himself has filed a suit at O.S. 222 of 1986 in the very same court praying for rectification of the "number" of the schedule property in the sale deed by which he is said to have purchased the property. It was therefore alleged by him that there is a dispute with reference to the identity of the property in question. It was also alleged by him that in O.S. No. 286 of 1990 the plaintiffs therein have filed a suit for permanent injunction against the present revision petitioner praying for a decree restraining him from dispossessing them and had in fact, obtained an order of temporary injunction on 8-9-1990. The judgment-debtor (present respondent) is one of the defendants in the said suit. It was therefore contended by the instant respondent in the said LA. No. II that in view of the pendency of the aforesaid two suits, the execution of the order in HRC 1 of 1987 is liable to be stayed.