L PARSOTAM SARAN Vs. BBARHMA NAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been referred to a Bench of three Judges at the instance of the learned Judges who first heard it. The reason for the reference was that they felt doubtful about the soundness of the case of Sahu Nand Kishore V/s. Shadi Ram .

(2.) The question for decision is whether in the circumstances of the case, the stay order passed by the High Court should have the effect of nullifying a sale that was held before the order of this Court could be communicated either to the Court below or to the officer conducting the sale.

(3.) The facts of the case are given in the referring order and I will mention them very briefly only in order to indicate the precise point I have to decide. The judgment-debtor who is the appellant before this court filed certain objections to the execution of a decree held against him by the decree-holders respondents. His objection was dismissed by the execution Court on the 12 of January 1924. The date fixed for sale in execution of the decree was the 21 of January 1924. On the same 21 of January the judgment-debtor, on the strength of his having filed an appeal against the order of the 12 of January 1924, put in an application for stay of the sale, fixed for the same day. Apparently the attention of toe learned Judge was not drawn to the fact that the sale was going to be held on the very day he was passing the order; for, otherwise, I take it, he would not have made an order, the compliance with which would have been practically impassible. The stay was granted and was to be till the disposal of the hearing of the rule issued. When the rule was returned, the Judges made the following order: The sale having already taken place no stay order can be passed now. The application is accordingly rejected.