SHIVAJI YALLAPPA WAGMODE Vs. GANGABAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Rasheed Khan holding brief for Sri Vigneshwara Shastry, learned Counsel for the petitioners.

(2.) THIS revision arises from the judgment and order dated 2-7-1994 passed by the I Additional Munsiff, Hubli, on an application under Order 41, Rule 6 (2) read with Section 151 of the CPC rejecting to grant the order to stay the sale of property in execution decree.

(3.) THE facts of the case in the nut-shell are that, the plaintiffs-respondents decree holders had filed the suit for a decree for specific performance of contract or in alternative for return of sale advance with interest. The Trial Court decreed that suit vide judgment and order dated 18-8-1991. Feeling aggrieved from the judgment and decree, the defendants preferred the appeal which is pending before the Civil Court namely R. A. No. 112 of 1991. I am informed that appeal is yet pending. The applicant had also filed an application for interim stay under Order 41, Rule 5 of CPC. The Appellate Court granted a stay order subject to the condition of furnishing security deposit amount under the decree within certain time given by the Court. But on account of failure of the appellant-judgment-debtor, the Appellate Court vacated the stay order. Thereafter the applicant moved an application under Order 41, Rule 6 before the execution Court on 9-12-1993 for stay of further proceedings in the execution case. But the stay application was also rejected i. e. , after contest the application was rejected by the execution Court. The applicant filed the second application under Order 41, Rule 6 for the relief. The Trial Court opined that once the stay order was granted with certain conditions to deposit the amount and the judgment-debtor failed and did not comply with the orders passed, no equity remained in his favour to grant the stay order and rejected the application. So feeling aggrieved from that order, judgment-debtor has come up before this court by way of revision under Section 115.