Back
ARUN BHANSALI
Basanti Devi – Appellant
Versus
Lrs of Anand Kanwar – Respondent
ORDER
1. The matters come up on an application filed by the appellants under Section 151 CPC seeking setting aside of order dated 03.08.2021 passed by the executing court and seeking a direction that the executing court shall not proceed further with execution of the impugned decree dated 21.12.2018.
2. It is, inter alia, indicated that a consolidated decree dated 21.12.2018 was passed by the trial court in two suits being Civil Original Suit No. 239/2005 and 57/2005. Feeling aggrieved, the present appeals being SBC FA Nos. 94/2019 and 97/2019 were filed by the appellants-defendants.
3. By a common order dated 12.04.2019 passed by this Court, it was, inter alia, directed as under:-
Further, during the pendency of the appeal
The court clarified that mesne profits must be paid separately for each suit as decreed, emphasizing the importance of adhering to trial court orders during execution.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's discretion to grant a stay of execution of an ex-parte decree, subject to the petitioner complying with the undertaking of payment of m....
Non-compliance with specific court directions and lack of justification for non-compliance may lead to the dismissal of an application seeking modification of an order.
The court upheld the appellate court's conditional stay of execution, emphasizing the tenant's obligation to pay rent and mesne profit as per the decree.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the procedure under Order 20 Rule 12 CPC for the passing of a decree for possession and mesne profits should be followed only when a suit is f....
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
