DINESH KUMAR Vs. K S VAIKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A preliminary objection has been raised by Shri P.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent no.5/decree holder that this revision is not maintainable because to stay the execution proceedings an application was submitted by the applicants before the Executing Court but that application has been rejected by the impugned order and hence looking to the proviso to Section 115 CPC which has been introduced by amendment on 1.7.2002 this revision is not maintainable.

(2.) HOWEVER , Shri Akhilesh Jain, learned counsel appearing for the applicants/judgment -debtors submitted that if the application filed under Section 151 of the applicants -judgment debtors is allowed the execution proceedings would come to an end.

(3.) ACCORDING to me, even if that application of applicants is allowed, the execution proceedings would not come to an end and at the most they shall be stayed. Hence, I am of the view that the preliminary objection raised by Shri Mishra, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.5/decree -holder is having merit and the same is hereby sustained.