BHOLARAM GIRDHARILAL AGARWAL Vs. THE NANDED SIKH GURUDWARA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Katneshwarkar, learned Counsel for petitioners and Shri Mandlik, Senior Counsel for Respondent No.1. No notice has been issued to Respondent No.2-A, as admittedly, he is a formal party.

(2.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties.

(3.) The only contentious issue, that this writ petition raises, is about the limitation period for execution of the decree; whether it starts from the date of passing of the decree or from the date on which the decree becomes enforceable Another incidental question thrown open for consideration by the writ petition is whether or not doctrine of merger, resulting in temporary suspension of limitation period for execution of decree, can be applied in a case like the present one wherein there were two different proceedings initiated by the rival parties and which were pending for consideration before various Courts at different levels.