IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: February 21, 2025 Vinod Kumar ...Petitioner Versus Sukhchain Lal ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ARCHANA PURI Present: Mr.Sunil Chadha, Senior Advocate with Ms.Taanvi Dhull, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Hitesh Ghai, Advocate for the respondent.

****

ARCHANA PURI, J.

The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, thereby, seeking modification of the order dated 25.04.2023 (Annexure P-3) passed by learned Addl. District Judge, whereby, while allowing an application filed by the petitioner under Order XLI Rule 5 CPC, vis-a-vis, staying the operation of the judgment and decree dated 14.10.2021 passed by learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), a direction was given to the petitioner to deposit 50% of the decretal amount, within a period of one month, from the date of receipt of the said order.

Upon notice, the respondent made appearance through counsel.

Learned counsel for the parties heard.

The facts germane, to be noticed, are as follows:-

That, respondent-plaintiff, who is real brother of the petitioner-

defendant had filed a suit for recovery of Rs.14,00,000/-, along with interest @ 12% per annum, pendente-lite from the date of suit, till the passing of the decree, along with future interest, vis-a-vis, the property, as detailed in the plaint, towards occupation charges/mesne profits, on account of alleged usage of the shop in question, by the petitioner-defendant. The said suit was decreed vide judgment dated 14.10.2021 by learned Addl. Civil Judge, Ludhiana, copy whereof is Annexure P-1.

Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and decree, the petitioner-defendant had filed an appeal and along with the same, an application under Order XLI Rule 5 CPC was filed for seeking stay of the execution and operation of the impugned judgment and decree dated 14.10.2021. Upon this, vide order dated 25.04.2023 (Annexure P-3), learned Addl. District Judge, had allowed the application of the petitioner-

defendant and the order so passed, is reproduced, as herein given:-

“Heard on an application U/o 41 Rule 5 read with Sec.

151 CPC for staying execution and operation of judgment and decree dated 14.10.2021 passed by the court of Mr. Sumit Makkar, Additional. Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ludhiana, till disposal of the appeal.

2. It has been averred in the application that the impugned judgment and decree have not assumed finality and are appealable and the appeal lies before this court. The appellant has a right to o in for against the impugned judgment and decree of Ld. Lower Court. It has been further averred that in case the execution and operation of the impugned judgment and decree under appeal are not stayed, then the very purpose of filing the present appeal shall stand frustrated. Finally, prayer for staying the execution and operation of the impugned judgment and decree, has thus, been made.

3. Upon notice of the application, the respondent caused appearance through his counsel and filed written reply, wherein, he opposed the averments put in the application and prayed for dismissal of the same.

4. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions, contents of the application, reply filed thereto, coupled with due assistance rendered, the court finds merit in the submission of learned counsel for the applicant/appellant. The applicants took specific plea that they will suffer an irreparable loss, which shall not be compensated in terms of money, if the operation of impugned judgment and decree is not stayed till the disposal of the appeal. In my opinion, in order to avoid multiplicity of litigation, the application on hand deserves to be allowed and accordingly, the same is allowed and execution and operation of judgment and decree dated 14.10.2021 passed by the court of Mr. Sumit Makkar, Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ludhiana, is hereby stayed till the final decision of the appe