V.Nath, J.

Mr. Devendra Prasad Sharma, advocate, has appeared on behalf of the petitioner and has submitted that he has no instruction from the petitioner and has prayed for adjournment. However, Mr. Rajendra Narayan, the learned senior counsel, has pointed out that this revision application arises out of an eviction suit filed in the year 2003on ground of personal necessity and the order of stay of execution case has been obtained by the petitioner as far back as on 05.04.2010. It has been further pointed out that on the joint prayer of the parties, this matter has been fixed for hearing today on priority basis and in this background, the prayer has been made to hear and dispose of this revision application on merits.

2. It appears that by order dated 05.04.2010 passed in this revision application, further proceeding of execution case, initiated for delivery of possession over the suit premises, was stayed on the basis of the prayer made in I.A.No. 3031 of 2010 filed by the petitioner. Subsequently, the order was passed to consider the said interlocutory application at the time of admission. When this revision application was being admitted for hearing, both the partie