KEWAL KRISHAN Vs. MST. KARTARI ETC.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application purporting to be under Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the Appellant Shri Kewal Krishan prays for a stay of the operation of the order passed by this Court in second appeal, whereby reversing the decision of the first Appellate Judge, the suit for possession of one Shrimati Kartari has been decreed. It is contended on behalf of the Appellant, that in case the decree is executed and he is dispossessed of the land, he is likely to suffer substantial loss. The application has been made without unreasonable delay and he is prepared to furnish whatever security is asked for by the Court. On these grounds, it is prayed that the execution of the impugned order be stayed.

(2.) Although the application has been put under Sec. 151, yet the principle evolved in Order 41, Rule 5 would be amenable to the situation. It is then for this Court to see as to whether substantial loss would accrue if stay is not granted. It is, however, conceded that there is no un -reasonable delay in filing the petition and that the Appellant is prepared to give the security whatever is fixed by the Court.

(3.) This matter was formerly listed before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice and at that stage some question regarding jurisdiction was raised, referable to the power of this Court against whose decision the Letters Patent Appeal is filed, to grant the stay of the operation of its own orders. The learned Chief Justice left that question open and preferred to get listed this petition in this Court. However, the learned Counsel for the Respondents has specifically given up his plea regarding jurisdiction, and he even conceded that in view of a former decision of this Court (specified in the order of the learned Chief Justice) he would not question the jurisdiction for the making of any stay order. The learned Counsel at the same time seriously contested that on the merits of the case, no stay can be granted.