TUSHAR NATH BHATTACHARJEE Vs. VINNETTA KHARSYNTIEW

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Regarding property in dispute, two separate suits one by the petitioners herein bearing Title Suit No.10 (T) 2004 was instituted on 07.04.2004 which finally stand decreed and another by the respondent Smti. Vinnetta Kharsyntiew bearing Title Suit No.27 (T) 2004 instituted in the month of July 2004 renumbered as No.188 (T) 2013 before the same Court i.e. in the Court of Assistant to Deputy Commissioner, Shillong, is still pending.

(2.) Order dated 07.12017, passed by the Court of Assistant to Deputy Commissioner, Shillong, allowing the application of respondents (judgment debtors) under Order 21, Rule 29 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 staying the execution of decree dated 06.05.2013, till disposal of Title Suit No.188 (t) 2013, is sought to be quashed by invoking power under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India. The petition has been registered as CR (P) [Civil Revision], because the petitioner has wrongly styled it as Civil Revision when in fact petition is under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners (decree holders) contended that execution of the decree was not warranted to be stayed. The jurisdiction under Order 21, Rule 29 Civil Procedure Code has to be exercised with great care and caution so that the decree holder is not deprived of reaping the fruits of the decree.