Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Ram Briksh Sonar & Ors vs State Of Jharkhand on 13 June, 2012

Author: Jaya Roy

Bench: Jaya Roy

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                  S.A. No. 34 of 2007
                  1. Ram Briksh Sonar
                  2. Ram Kishore Prasad Sonar
                  3. Sheo Prasad Sonar             ... ...    Appellants
                                         Versus
                  Bhagwan Das Verma      ...  ...  ...     Respondent
                              ---
                  CORAM       : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE JAYA ROY

                  For the Appellants : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate
                  For the Respondent : Mr. Birendra Kr., Neeraj Kishore, Advcoate

                           I.A. No. 2647 of 2010

12/13.06.2012

The appellants have filed this interlocutory application under Order 41 Rule 5 of the C.P.C. for stay of further proceeding of Execution Case No. 3 of 2009 pending in the Court of Sub-Judge -II Koderma.

Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the instant appeal has already been admitted vide order dated 06.09.2011. It is also submitted that the appellants are residing in the premises in question with his family members since long, therefore, if the further proceeding of Execution case is not stayed, he will suffer irreparable loss.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent has submitted that though the suit of ejectment has been decreed in his favour but till date he could not enjoy the fruit of the decree. It is also submitted that the respondent is also residing in certain portion of the said premises.

Considering the submissions made by the parties and considering the fact that the appeal has already been admitted by this Court vide order dated 06.09.2011. I stay the further proceeding of Execution case No. 6 of 2009 during the pendency of this appeal on the condition that the appellants will submit indemnity bond of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) to the Execution Court within a period of one month from the date of this order.

The respondent is at liberty to move before the motion Bench for fixing the date of hearing of this case.

With the aforesaid direction, I.A. No. 2647 of 2010 stands disposed of.

(Jaya Roy, J.) Satayendra