Back
N. SATHISH KUMAR
Karunamoorthy – Appellant
Versus
Padma – Respondent
ORDER :
N. Sathish Kumar, J.
1. Challenge has been made to the Order passed by the Execution Court in dismissing the Execution Proceedings filed by the revision petitioner, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed.
2. The brief facts leading to filing of this revision petition is as follows:
The revision petitioners originally filed a suit in O.S.No.164 of 2020 for mandatory injunction directing the defendants to remove the compound wall and gate said to have been constructed in the petitioners' land. The said suit has been decreed in favour of the petitioners. Challenging the said decree and judgment, it appears that the respondent has filed an appeal in A.S.No.30 of 2023 on the file of the Sub Court, Namakkal. However, no stay of the judgment and decree of the trial Court is granted by the first appellate Court. At this stage, the revision petitioner filed an execution petition to execute the decree passed in the above suit. The execution Court has dismissed the execution petition since the appeal in A.S.No.30 of 2023 is pending before the Sub Court, Namakkal. Challenging the same, the present revision petition has been filed.
3. Heard both sides and perused the entire mater
Mere pendency of an appeal does not stay execution proceedings unless explicitly ordered by the appellate court, as per Order 41 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The executing court cannot stay execution of its own decree; such authority lies with the appellate court.
A stay of execution in civil proceedings can be granted during the pendency of an appeal when sufficient cause is shown, pursuant to Order 21 Rule 26 of the CPC.
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 Executing Court may dismiss a stay application made incorrectly; an ex-parte decree is valid until set aside in the originating court.
The court upheld that non-parties to a decree lack standing to challenge execution unless sufficient grounds are established.
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
