ASHOK JAISWAL Vs. SHIVESH BHAGAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. K. K. Sahay, learned counsel appearing for the respondent has raised a preliminary point with regard to the jurisdiction of this Court for entertaining an Application for stay of the execution of the decree under challenge in the Revision Petition filed under the proviso to sub-section (8) of Section 14 of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982. According to him, on a conjoint reading of Sections 13 and 14 of the aforesaid Act, and in the absence of a specific provision in the Act for staying the execution of the decree challenged in a Revision Petition filed under the aforesaid proviso to sub-section (8) of Section 14, this Court has no jurisdiction to either entertain any Application for staying the execution of the decree or to pass order of a stay.

(2.) The argument is iterated only to be rejected for the simple reason and on a plain ground that the proviso to sub-section (8) itself clearly provides that the High Court may, for the purpose of satisfying itself that an order under challenge has been passed in accordance with law, call for the records of the case and "pass such orders in respect thereto as it thinks fit" The expression "pass such orders in respect thereto as it thinks fit" clearly connotes legislative intention that the High Court while entertaining a Revision Petition has the powers and jurisdiction to pass appropriate orders with relation to and having regard to the facts of the case and on appreciation of relevant aspects of the matter. This apart, when statute confers the power upon a Court to entertain a Revision Petition against an order passed by a trial Court, in the absence of a specific provision restraining or prohibiting the grant of stay of the execution of the decree under challenge, entertaining a revision petition and not passing order of stay may amount to an empty formality and a mere ritual and in some cases may also cause miscarriage of justice. A conjoint reading of Sections 13 and 14, therefore, leads to only one interpretation and that is that the provision contained in the proviso to sub-section (8) of Section 14 of the Act inherently contains the power of staying the execution of the decree under challenge that the High Court may exercise while entertaining a Revision application and on application/prayer for staying execution of the decree, if the circumstances of the case so warrant.

(3.) After hearing learned Advocates for the parties with regard to the merits of the stay matter, I feel inclined to grant a stay of the execution of the decree until disposal of the Revision Petition. The decree under challenge, therefore, shall remain stayed until disposal of this petition. Hearing of the case shall be expedited. The petition at Flag 'X' is thus disposed of. Ordered accordingly.