A.SAMBASIVA RAO
Mohd. Surhanuddin – Appellant
Versus
Savitri Bai – Respondent
( 2 ) THE following circumstances are material for consideration of this question. In O. S. No. 49 of 1969 in the district Munsiff s Court, Bhainsa, there was a decree for possession passed against the present petitioner. On his application, the trial Court stayed the execution of the decree under Order 41 rule 5 (2), Civil Procedure Code, till 16th of june, 1972 to enable him to approach the appellate Court for appropriate stay orders. Accordingly the petitioner preferred A. S. No. 12 of 1972 to the District court, Adilabad, and obtained orders of stay in I. A. No. 465 of 1972 on 16th june, 1972. Since the stay was granted by the Court of first instance only till 16th June, 1972 the matter was posted before that Court for execution. On that day, expecting orders of stay from the appellate Court, the Bhainsa Court adjourned the matter to 17th June, 1972 that day, however, no formal order was received from the appellate Court, but the Advocate for the petitioner filed an affi
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.