ORDER

This petition by the JDR No.2 in Ex.No.89/2018 on the file of the Prl. Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Srirangapatna, is directed against the impugned order dated 02.03.2024, whereby the application I.A.7 filed by the petitioner under Section 151 CPC for permission to deposit the amount as directed by the trial court in its order dated 17.12.2022 by condoning the delay was rejected by the Executing court.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.

3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that in the aforesaid execution proceedings instituted by the 1st respondent – decree holder against the petitioner – JDR No.2 and respondent No.2 – JDR No.1, the Executing court passed an order dated 17.12.2022 allowing I.A.2 filed by the petitioner under Order 21 Rule 26 CPC and stayed further proceedings subject to the petitioner depositing Rs.5 lakhs before the next date of hearing and posted the matter on 21.01.2023. Subsequently, since the petitioner neither complied with the said order nor appeared before the Executing court, the Court passed an order on 18.03.2023 noting the non-compliance and issued notice to the petitioner. Subsequently, on 15.07.2023 also, the petitioner did not comply with the earlier order and instead filed I.A.No.7 and sought for permission to deposit Rs.5 lakhs as directed by the Executing court on 17.12.2022 by extending the time. The said application I.A.7 having been opposed by the 1st respondent – decree holder, the Executing court proceeded to pass the impugned order rejecting the application, aggrieved by which, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition.

4. A perusal of the undisputed material on record, in particular, the proceedings before the Executing court is sufficient to come to the conclusion that despite sufficient and reasonable opportunity being provided to the petitioner, she has not shown any inclination to comply with the order dated 17.12.2022 directing her to deposit Rs.5 lakhs. In fact, even till this day and also during the pendency of the present petition, the petitioner has not made any payment towards the decreetal amount and her conduct clearly disentitles her from seeking any equitable or discretionary relief at the hands of this Court. Under these circumstances, having regard to the conduct of the petitioner in not only non-complying with the orders of the Executing court but also protracting the execution proceedings, I am of the view that the Executing court was fully justified in passing the impugned order which cannot be said to have occasioned any failure of justice warranting interference by this Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction as held by the Apex Court in the case of Radhey Shyam Vs. Chhabi Nath - (2015) 5 SCC 423.

5. Accordingly, I do not find merit in the petition and the same is hereby dismissed.