Back
BIBHAS RANJAN DE
Renu Shaw – Appellant
Versus
Haradhan Ghosh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. affidavit of service and challenge to the previous order. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments against blanket stay orders without conditions. (Para 5 , 6 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. need for conditions in stay orders acknowledged. (Para 7 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. order of disposal with communication directives. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
JUDGMENT :
BIBHAS RANJAN DE, J.
1. Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record.
2. None appears on behalf of the opposite parties in spite of service.
3. The order dated 6th December, 2022 passed by the learned Judge, 5th Bench, Presidency Small Causes Court at Calcutta, has been challenged in this application.
4. By the impugned order, the learned Judge, 5th Bench, Presidency Small Causes Court at Calcutta, took up an application for stay filed by the opposite parties/tenants and an application under Order IX Rule 13 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside the ex-parte decree passed on 2nd May, 2016 along with one application under Section 5 of the LIMITATION ACT . From the order impugned, it appears that the decree-holder filed one Misc. Case for police help. From the order impugned, it further appears that the application
The executing court cannot stay execution of its own decree; such authority lies with the appellate court.
Order 21 Rule 29 CPC applies only when both the execution proceedings and the suit between the decree-holder and judgment debtor are pending before the same Court. Section 151 CPC cannot be used to s....
The main legal point established is that the pendency of a second appeal does not automatically warrant a stay of execution proceedings, and the High Court's jurisdiction to pass interim orders is co....
The main legal point established is that the stay application should be decided before the execution of an eviction order to prevent substantial prejudice to the rights of the party against whom the ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the petitioner to establish a sufficient cause to seek a stay of the decree under Order XXI, Rule 29, and the presumption in fa....
Parties cannot pursue stay applications simultaneously in different courts without risking delays; the conduct of petitioners may warrant dismissal of stay requests.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
