Himachal Pradesh High Court
Lrs Chainchla Devi & Ors. vs . Ram Ditta on 17 July, 2023
Author: Virender Singh
Bench: Virender Singh
Onkar Singh since deceased through his .
LRs Chainchla Devi & Ors. Vs. Ram Ditta since deceased through his LRs. Chain Singh & Ors.
RSA No.193 of 2022 17.07.2023 Present: Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate, for the appellants.
Mr. Ajay Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Atharv Sharma, Advocate, for the respondents.
CMP No.9921 of 2022 By way of present application, which has been moved under Order 41 Rule 5 read with Section 151 of CPC, learned counsel for the appellants have sought stay of the operation of the impugned judgment and decree.
Perusal of the record shows that respondent Ram Ditta had filed the suit for possession against the present appellants. The said suit has been dismissed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Divison), Jawali, District Kangra, H.P (hereinafter referred to as the learned trial Court) vide judgment and decree dated 16.08.2016.
Against the said judgment and decree, respondent-Ram Ditta & Others have preferred the appeal before the Court of learned Additional District Judge-II, Kangra at Dharamshala (hereinafter referred to as the learned first Appellate Court) and vide Judgment and decree dated 18.04.2022, the said appeal has been allowed and the suit of the plaintiff-Ram Ditta was ::: Downloaded on - 18/07/2023 20:37:18 :::CIS ordered to be decreed, by passing a decree for vacant .
possession by way of demolition of structure and removal of 'Malba' against the defendants. The defendants were also directed to vacate the possession.
Against the said judgment and decree, the defendants are before this Court by way of present RSA.
In this application, a prayer has been made to stay the operation of the judgment and decree passed by learned first Appellate Court in Civil Appeal RBT No.27- J/XIII/2021/2017. The application is duly supported with an affidavit.
This application has been contested by the respondents/plaintiffs on the ground that there is no merit in the appeal and in addition, a prayer has been made that the applicants/defendants may be put to terms in the shape of issuing direction to deposit the sum of Rs. 5,000/- per month, as use and occupation charges.
Mr. Atharv Sharma, Advocate for the respondents/plaintiffs has prayed that the application may kindly be dismissed.
The present appeal has been filed against the judgment of reversal. The suit of the plaintiff was initially dismissed, however, later on, the same was decreed. The appeal will take sufficient long time for its decision and ::: Downloaded on - 18/07/2023 20:37:18 :::CIS for accepting the contention of the plaintiff with regard to .
the direction to the defendants to pay the use and occupation charges for the same requires meticulous examination of the factual position and for that a separate application is required to be moved.
As such, during the pendency of the appeal, the operation of impugned judgment and decree dated 18.04.2022 passed by learned first Appellate Court in Civil Appeal RBT No.27-J/XIII/2021/2017 is ordered to be stayed, subject to furnishing surety bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- by the applicants to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court by giving an undertaking to abide by the judgment and decree, which would be ultimately passed by this Court and payment of mesne profit, if any, assessed by the Executing Court. Finding so recorded are confined to the disposal of the application and the same have no bearing on the merits of the case.
Application is thus disposed of.
RSA No.193 of 2022List for consideration on admission on 11.09.2023.
( Virender Singh ) Judge July 17, 2023 (Pathania) ::: Downloaded on - 18/07/2023 20:37:18 :::CIS