Prakash Krishna, J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties. None appeared on behalf of the opposite party No. 4 namely NOIDA.
(2.) The above revision arises out of execution proceedings and is directed against the order dated 5.2.2002 passed in L.A.R. No. 389 of 1991 whereby the application filed by the present applicant for payment of the amount due under the decree to him, has been rejected. The Executing Court has held that the payment shall be made in favour of the person in whose favour i.e. M/s. Capital Finance of India Ltd., opposite party No. 1 herein, the said L.A.R has been decided and the present applicant may file suit for recovery on the basis of the agreement set up by him. The objection filed by the applicant was consequently dismissed as misconceived.
(3.) The facts of the case are almost admitted but the question of adjustment of equities between the parties, raises a vexed question of law.;