(1.) This appeal filed by the judgment-debtor against the order of dismissal of their objection arises out of the following circumstances.
(2.) The decree-holder obtained a decree for specific performance of a contract of sale. The operative portion of the judgment is as follows:
(3.) The aforesaid decree was passed on 5th October, 1950. On 4th November, 1950, that is within thirty days, the decree-holder sent a telegram to the judgment-debtor to execute the sale-deed. The decree-holder further said that he was prepared to pay the sale-price. A reply to this telegram was sent by the judgment-debtor on 6th November, 1950, stating that he was filing an appeal against the order. On 4th December, 1952, an application was made by the judgment-debtor under Section 35 of the Specific Relief Act for rescission of the contract which was registered as Misc. Case No. 51 of 1952. A few days after that is on 13th December, 1952 the decree-holders filed an application for execution of the decree for specific performance requesting the Court to get a sale-deed executed in terms of the decree. This was registered as Execution No. 43 of 1952. The judgment-debtors filed an objection to this execution under Section 47 Civil Procedure Code. Both these objections of the judgment-debtors that is the application under Section 35 of the Specific Relief Act and the objection filed by them under Section 47 were heard together and were dismissed by the learned Civil Judge on 16th May, 1953. He ordered the decree-holders to deposit the sale consideration within a week and also ordered the judgment-debtors to execute the sale-deed. It is this order which has been questioned in this appeal by the judgment-debtors. It has not been disputed before me on behalf of the parties, as stated by the learned counsel for the decree-holders, that after the aforesaid order of the Court a sale-deed of the property has already been executed in favour of the decree-holders by the Court, and the decree-holders have also obtained possession over the property.