SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Raj) 2108

PRAKASH GUPTA
Nemi Chand – Appellant
Versus
Dinesh – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Mr. Manoj Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate, for the Respondent.

ORDER

1. Matter comes up on an application under Section 151 CPC for passing appropriate order on the stay application.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants-defendants (for short, 'the defendants') submits that the defendants filed the aforesaid appeal challenging the judgment and decree dated 29.2.2016 passed by the trial court. Alongwith the appeal, stay application was also filed. The appeal and the stay application are pending since the year 2016, but till date no effective order has been passed. Now the execution proceedings have been commenced, therefore, appropriate order is required to be passed on the stay application.

3. He further submits that the defendants were not the party in the agreement dated 10.7.1986, therefore no decree for specific performance of the agreement could have been passed against them and for this reason, the same is not executable against them. The respondents-plaintiffs (for short, 'the plaintiffs') wrongly claimed the decree of specific performance against them.

4. He further submits that the defendants are in possession of the suit property, hence operation and / execution of the impugned judgment and decree is required to be stayed.

5. On the other

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top