SMT. SHAMIM FATIMA Vs. SMT. MAHMOOD FATIMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TWO counter affidavits have been filed which are taken on record. Learned counsel for both the parties state that by order dated 18.03.1998 the appeal stands admitted. I agree.

(2.) SRI H.M. Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellant has argued that at least appellant is entitled to the benefit of Section 4 of Partition Act as property in dispute is dwelling house and appellant's sister -respondent has sold her share to a stranger. Learned counsel for the respondent /party which has purchased the property in dispute in 1998 during pendency of this appeal states that twice this question was raised before the Executing Court and on both occasions the matter was decided against the appellant, revision was dismissed and at one stage the matter came to the High Court where it was observed that second appeal was already pending hence there was no need to decide anything in the writ petition. Learned counsel for the purchaser -respondent further states that appellant has all along been stating that she would be depositing the amount but for about 14 years no amount has been deposited.

(3.) LIST on 16.03.2012 before the appropriate Court. The case shall not be treated to be part heard or tied up to me. Actual possession pursuant to the final decree shall not be delivered to the purchaser -respondent till 16.03.2012. However it is made clear this stay order will not be extended even for a single day under any circumstances unless the aforesaid amount of Rs. 3,54,000/ - is deposited within two months from today.