Document Fragment View
Matching Fragments
In view of the urgency and the facts as aforesaid, this revisional application is taken up for hearing. Perused the revisional application and the documents annexed thereto.
2It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that he is the tenant/defendant in the court below and there occasioned a communication gap between his clients and the concerned learned Counsel and as a result due to the absence of the defendant-tenant the Eviction Suit filed against the defendants was decreed ex parte and against that order the present petitioners-defendants filed a Misc. Case under Order 9 Rule 13 of the C.P.C. before the said learned court. He also submitted that in the meantime the opposite parties-plaintiffs filed Execution case on the basis of the said ex parte decree passed in Ejectment Suit No. 83 of 2006 and in connection with that Execution Case, the opposite parties-plaintiffs filed the application under Order 21 Rule 97 of the C.P.C. praying for police help for execution of the decree although the Misc. case arising out of Order 9 Rule 13 of the C.P.C. filed by the present petitioners-defendants is still pending. He also submitted that the present petitioners filed an application in the said Execution case, staying further proceeding of the said Execution case till the disposal of the Misc. case filed by him under Order 9 Rule 13 of the C.P.C. but that prayer for stay has been turned down by the learned court below by the impugned order dated 05.03.2012 and being aggrieved by that order, the present petitioners-defendants has come up before this court.