PANDU LAXMAN MORE Vs. BALU MAHADU PATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case one Pandu Laxman, the appel. lantherein, got a decree in Suit No. 517 of 1898, in the Subordinate Judge's Court, against the defendant Babaji and others to recover possession of certain lands and profits and mesne profits. Defendant appealed (No. 296 of 1901) from the above decree and applied to the Thana District Court for stay of execution. That Court on the 31 January 1902, directed a notice to issue to the plaintiff and in the meantime ordered execution to stay on the applicant, the judgment-debtor furnishing security. On the 19 March 1902, Ba a Mahadu, the present respondent, stool security to the judgment- debtor, and on the 21 March the Subordinate Judge reported to the District Court that execution had been stayed on the respondent having furnished security.

(2.) Apparently after this Balu applied to have his security-bond cancelled, and on the 4 April 1902 the Subordinate Judge reported that fact to the District Court and sought for further orders, and that Court on the 17 April made the following order :- Fifteen days time is granted to give fresh security.

(3.) Apparently further correspondence took place between the Subordinate Judge and the District Court, and on the 1 June 1903, the District Court passed the following order:- In this case the Subordinate Judge cancelled the security-bond of one man who had stood surety. The applicant is not willing to give fresh security. The case is, besides, not fit for making rule absolute, I discharge the rule.