MAHESH BHAGWATI, J. - (1.) CHALLENGE in this writ petition is to the order dated 13.10.2011, whereby the Additional District Judge (Fast Track) Chomu, District Jaipur although granted stay in favour of the petitioner-appellant, but imposed certain conditions.
(2.) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused the relevant material on record including the impugned order, it is noticed that the plaintiff-respondents filed a suit for eviction and recovery of rent against the petitioner before the learned trial court, which came to be decreed by the learned trial court vide judgment and decree dated 14.12.2010. Being aggrieved with the judgment and decree of the trial court, the petitioner preferred an appeal together with an application under Order 41 Rule 5 CPC for staying the execution of the judgment and decree passed by the trial court before the appellate court. The learned appellate court although granted stay in favour of the petitioner-appellant, but imposed certain conditions. The learned appellate court while granting stay directed the petitioner-appellant to pay mesne profit of Rs. 1500/- per month instead of Rs. 672/- per month since November, 2011. The impugned order, in the fact situation of the present case and looking to the fact that in the present times the prices are rising at galloping speed, is found to be just and apt. It is found not to have suffered from any infirmity. This writ petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. In the case of Shalini Shyam Shetty and Another Versus Rajendra Shankar Patil reported in (2010) 8 Supreme Court Cases 329, their Lordships of Hon'ble Apex Court have held that the power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is a reserved and exceptional power for judicial intervention to be exercised not merely for the grant of relief in any even of the case, but only to be directed for the promotion of public confidence in the administration of justice. It has been held that the power is unfettered, but subject to high degree of judicial discipline and interference is to be kept at the minimum. For the reasons stated above, the writ petition fails and the same being bereft of any merit deserves to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly in limine. Consequent upon the dismissal of writ petition, the stay application, filed therewith, does not survive and that also stands dismissed. ;