CHHABIL DAS Vs. GOKAL DAS AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application for clarification of the order of this Court dated August 17, 1978, as modified by the ordei dated September 21, 1978, has been presented by the decree -holders in this Court. The relevant facts may be briefly stated here.

(2.) THE District Judge, Pratapgarh, camp Chittorgarh passed a decree on December 8, 1976 against the petitioner Chhabildas on the basis of an award. The judgment -debtor Chhabildas filed an appeal in this Court challenging the validity of the award, which has been made a rule of the court and on the basis of which the decree dated December 8, 1976 was passed. In that appeal, which is still pending in this Court being D.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 219 of 1976, the judgment -debtor applied for stay of the execution of the decree and a conditional order of stay was passed by this Court on March 7, 1977 but the same has spent itself, as the judgment debtor did not comply with the conditions specified therein relating to depositing the decretal amount within two weeks. Subsequently, the decree holders applied for execution of the decree by attachment and sale of the Immovable property of the judgment -debtor. Then the judgment -debtor submitted an application under Order 41 Rule 6(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure praying for stay of sale of Immovable property The executing court by its order dated August 9, 1978 directed that Rs. 49,436/ - should be deposited by the judgment -debtor within one week or the judgment debtor should furnish a bank guarantee for the aforesaid amount within one week. Against this order a revision petition was preferred in this Court, which was decided by the order dated August 17, 1978 and the order passed by the executing court dated August 9, 1978 was modified to the extent that the judgment -debtor was allowed one week's further time from August 17, 1978 to deposit Rs. 20,000/ - in the executing court and the remaining decretal amount was directed to be deposited within 30 days from the date of the order of this Court. The judgment -debtor applied for extension of time and by the order dated November 21, 1978, the time for making the deposit was also extended and it was ordered that in case the judgment -debtor failed to deposit the decretal amount within the extended period, the decree -holders shall be entitled to proceed with the sale of the Immovable property. It is net in dispute that the judgment -debtor has already deposited the entire decretal amount within the time allowed by this Court. When the order passed by the executing court dated August 9, 1978 was not complied with, the decree holders submitted an application under Order 21 Rule 30 CPC for attachment and sale of the Immovable property of the judgment -debtor, which was dismissed by the order of the executing court dated October 7, 1978 on the ground that the judgment -debtor having deposited the entire decretal amount in the executing court, it would amount to abuse of the process of the court to proceed with the attachment and sale of the property of the judgment debtor. But the executing court surprisingly also directed the decree -holders to obtain an order from this Court for payment of the decretal amount deposited by the judgment -debtor in that court. This Court directed the decree holders by its order dated November 4, 1978 to move the executing court again for the payment of the decretal amount deposited by the judgment debtor in that court to them and on that basis the decree -holders moved the executing court again and a copy of the order passed by the executing court dated November 21, 1978 has been produced before this Court. The decree holders have prayed that the order parsed by this Court on August 17, 1978, as modified by the order dated September 21, 1978, be clarified as desired by the executing court.

(3.) NOW , the position is that the execution case is pending before the learned District Judge. The decree -holders have prayed for the execution of the decree in the sum of Rs. 49,436/ -.