BIREN ROY @ BIRENDRA NATH ROY Vs. BASANTI ROY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application is at the instance of the husband and is directed against the Order dated July 7, 2011 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Court, Jalpaiguri in Misc. Case No.05 of 2011 arising out of Money Execution Case No.6 of 2008 thereby rejecting the prayer for stay of the aforesaid Money Execution Case.

(2.) THE husband/petitioner herein instituted a matrimonial suit being Mat. Suit No.42 of 1988 for dissolution of marriage contending, inter alia, that the marriage between the two was solemnized according to Hindu Rights and Customs. But the wife/opposite party left the house of the husband without consent of the husband and without any reasonable excuse and thus, the wife deserted the petitioner. The petitioner and his nearly relations went to the house of the wife to take her back in vain. So, the suit was filed for divorce.

(3.) ON the selfsame ground, the prayer for stay was also sought for. That prayer was rejected by the learned Executing Court holding that the conduct of the judgment-debtor regarding payment was not satisfactory and so, the prayer for stay was rejected. Whatever may be the ground recorded by the learned Executing Court, the reliefs sought for in the application for stay and in the application under Section 47 of the CPC are one and same that is 'not to proceed with the Execution Case.' But, I find that the earlier order dated July 6, 2007 in Misc. Case No.57 of 1988 by which the permanent alimony was granted, has not been challenged by starting appropriate proceedings. It is only in the year 2011, when the application under Section 47 of the CPC has been filed by the husband challenging the inexecutability of the order. That shall be decided in due course as observed above. But the order of permanent alimony still remains in force.