JUDGMENT

A. P. SEN, J.:— The short point involved in this appeal by certificate from the judgment and order of a Full Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court dated October 17, 1969 (Reported in AIR 1970 Madh Pra 110) is whether a partial stay of execution of the decree like the one in question staying sale of the attached property is within sub-section (1) of Section 15 of the Limitation Act, 1908 so as to entitle the decree-holder to claim exclusion of the period during which there was stay of sale but the property was to continue under attachment, for the purpose of computation of the period of limitation provided by Section 48 of the Civil P. C., 1908. Since the question involved is a substantial question of law, the High Court has granted a certificate of fitness under Art. 133(1)(c) of the Constitution.

2. Facts are somewhat complicated but it is necessary to disentangle them to bring out the point in controversy. One Ghasiram, the predecessor-in-title of the present respondent No. I Ram Narain obtained a decree for Rupees. 5,548.18p. from the Court of the District Judge, Ujjain against one Bheraji, the predecessor-in-title of respondents Nos. 2 and 3 Chunnilal and Anandilal, no