H L NANTHA Vs. T C RAMALINGAM PILLAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition to revise the order of the learned District Munsif, Tenkasi, dated 21-7-1977 in E. A. No. 128 of 1976 in O. S. No. 20 of 1974. Admittedly certain suits instituted by the petitioner against the respondent on the file of the Court of the District Munsif, Tenkasi are pending. Equally admittedly the respondent had obtained a decree against the petitioner in O. S. No. 20 of 1974 on the file of the Sub Court of Tirunelveli. It is not again disputed that the decree in O. S. No. 20 of 1974 on the file of the Sub Court, Tirunelveli, had been transferred for execution to the court of the District Munsif, Tenkasi. The consequence is that before the District Munsif, Tenkasi, are pending the suits filed by the petitioners against the respondent herein and the execution proceedings in O. S. No. 20 of 1974. It is against the background of these facts, the petitioner filed E. A. No. 128 of 1976 under Order 21 Rule 29 C. P. C. for stay of execution proceedings in O. S. No. 20 of 1974. The learned District munsif by the impugned order dismissed the application. Hence the civil revision petition.

(2.) THE sole ground on which the learned District Munsif dismissed the execution application filed by the revision petitioner is that the decree in O. S. No. 20 of 1974 on the file of the Sub Court of Tirunelveli was not passed by the District munsif and therefore he had no competency to stay the execution proceedings of that decree. In coming to this conclusion, obviously the learned District munsif has overlooked the amendment made in Order 21 Rule 29 C. P. Code, by central Act 104 of 1976. After the amendment, Order 21 Rule 29 reads as follows:--