RAMPATI SATYA HARICHANDRA PRASAD Vs. ATKURI VENKATANARAYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision is filed against the order dated 20.7.2001 passed by the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur in I.A.No.865 of 2001 in A.S.No.31 of 2001.

(2.) The plaintiff in O.S.No.218 of 1995 on the file of the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kovvur, is the petitioner herein. The above suit was filed for declaration of easementary right and for consequential perpetual injunction. The trial Court after considering the respective contentions of the parties decreed the suit by judgment and decree dated 14.6.2001; against which appeal - A.S.No.31 of 2001 - has been filed by the defendant, respondent herein. He had also filed an application in I.A.No.865 of 2001 for stay and suspension of the execution of the decree dated 14.6.2001 in O.S.No. 218 of 1995. The appellate Court, after considering the matter, allowed the said application by order dated 20.7.2001; against which, the present revision has been filed.

(3.) At the outset, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the very grant of slay of the injunction decree is illegal and contrary to the provisions laid down under Order XLI, Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code and in support of his contention, he has relied upon the judgments of this Court in Pothura Venkata Rama Raju v. Yamlra Venkata Namsayya, 1097 (5) ALD 574 and Pokala Polaiah v. Pokula Avulaiah, 1998 (1) ALD 251. He further submits that the decree for perpetual injunction is not an executable decree and, therefore, the question of either staying or suspending the said decree would not arise and that, therefore, the impugned order is illegal and without jurisdiction.