NARSIDAS NATHUBHAI VOHRA Vs. MANHARSING AGARSING THAKOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revisional application against the order of the lower Court declining to take action under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2, and passing an order under Order XXI, Rule 29, of the Civil Procedure Code.

(2.) The applicant Narsidas Nathubhai Was the Karbhari of the talukdari estate of Gamph in the Dhandhuka Taluka in the Ahmedabad District. The opponent's father Agarsingji passed a document of pension dated January 6, 1915, in favour of the applicant with the approval of the Talukdari Settlement Officer by which a pension of Rs. 100 per month was agreed to be paid to him during his lifetime, and Rs. 50 per month to his heirs for one generation. On October 1, 1918, the applicant retired, or, as is stated on the other side, his services were dispensed with. The applicant received the amount of the pension up to May 81, 1921. The father of the opponent Thakor Agarsingji died on June 15, 1923, and was succeeded by his minor son the opponent Manharsingji. On October 7, 1925, the applicant brought a suit, No. 1232 of 1925, in the Court of the First Class Subordinate Judge at Ahmedabad against the Talukdari Settlement Officer as guardian of the present opponent to recover Rs. 5, 800 as arrears of pension and for a declaration that he was entitled to recover Rs. 100 per month till his death and his heirs Rs. 50 per month for one generation. The amount claimed in the suit was for fifty-two months from June 1, 1921, to September 30, 1925. The applicant obtained a decree. No appeal was filed against the decree, and on June 30, 1927, the applicant filed darkhast No. 525 of 1827 for Rs. 7, 000. On October 16, 1927, the present opponent attained majority and the estate was handed over to him. The opponent on November 7, 1928, brought suit No. 1453 of 1928 for setting aside the decree in suit No. 1232 of 1925 in the First Class Subordinate Judge's Court at Ahmedabad That suit came on for trial before the Joint First Class Subordinate Judge at Ahmedabad, Mr. Yajnik, The execution proceedings referred to above were pending in the Court of the First Class Subordinate Judge, Mr. Jhaveri. On November 8, 1928, the opponent made an application for an interim injunction under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2, and also prayed for any other order which Court might deem fit to pass under the circumstances.

(3.) On October 21, 1929, the learned Joint First Class Subordinate Judge, Mr. Yajnik, passed a final order under Order XXI, Rule 29, staying the execution of the decree till the suit filed by the opponent was finally decided. The learned Judge held that the application for injunction was not maintainable under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2, and did not think it proper to pass any order under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, but thought that an order under Order XXI, Rule 29, would meet the ends of justice in the present case, and passed an order staying the execution of the decree till the final decision of the suit. This application has been filed to revise the order of Mr. Yajnik passed under Order XXI, Rule 29.