TARUN CHATTERJEE, J. - (1.) THIS revisional application is being moved with notice to the learned Advocate for the caveator.
(2.) THIS revisional application is moved against an order passed by the learned Judge, 3rd Bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta rejecting an application for stay of all further proceedings in Execution Case No. 134 of 1992 till the disposal of an objection filed by the petitioner under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure which has given rise to Misc. Case No. 2425 of 1995. The opposite party No. 2 as a plaintiff instituted a suit against the opposite party No. 1 for his eviction in respect of premises No. 90/1A Indian Miror Street, Police Station Taltala, Calcutta - 700 013 (hereinafter referred to as the said premises). The said eviction suit was decreed in favour of the opposite party No. 2. An execution proceeding being Execution Case No. 134 of 1992 has been started at the instance of the decree holder/opposite party No. 2. Challenging the executibility of the said decree for eviction passed against the tenant/opposite party No.1, petitioner has filed an objection under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure which has given rise to as noted hereinabove, Misc. Case No. 2425 of 1995. In the objection under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure the petitioner has alleged that he is a monthly tenant in respect of one room on the second floor of the said premises at a monthly rental of Rs. 50/- payable according to English Calendar month under the judgment debtor/opposite party No. 1. From the objection-petition it is evident that the petitioner has claimed that he was inducted as a sub-tenant by the tenant/opposite party No. 1 on and from Ist day of March 1980. It is also evident from the said objection that due intimation of the creation of the sub-tenancy in favour of the petitioner was given to the landlady and the present decree holder/opposite party No. 2 as such it must be said that sub-tenancy was within the knowledge of the decree holder/opposite party No. 2. Therefore, the petitioner being a representative of the original tenant within the meaning of Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure is entitled to raise the question of excutibility of the decree passed against the tenant/opposite party No. 1. An application for stay of the execution proceeding was filed by the objector/petitioner till the disposal of the aforsaid misc. case filed under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure. By the impugned order, as noted hereinabove, the said petition was rejected.
(3.) FEELING aggrieved by this order of the Executing Court, the petitioner has come up to this Court in revision.;