P.K.LOHRA,J. - (1.) Appellants, by the instant second stay application under Order 41 Rule 5 CPC, have prayed for staying effect and operation of proclamation dated 14.01.2019 (Annex.A/1), issued by Additional District Judge No.5, Jodhpur Metropolitan (for short, 'learned Court below').
(2.) Earlier, while considering prayer for interim relief, upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, the Court passed following order on 13.012.2017: "Heard learned counsel for the parties on the prayer for grant of interim relief. After hearing learned counsels for the parties, it is deemed expedient and hence ordered, that the learned Executing Court, in furtherance of the judgment and decree dated 19.01.2008, passed by the learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No.4, Jodhpur in Civil Original Suit No.11/2006 titled as "Ratan Singh and Anr. Vs. Narpat Singh", shall conduct bidding, of the property in question, inter se between the parties. It is made clear that the appellants, namely, (1) Smt. Sita Rani, (2) Smt. Usha and (3) LRs of Smt. Nanda Kumari, being the daughters of Late Shri Ratan Singh, shall also be permitted to participate in the bidding process. The parties to the suit, including the appellants, may appear before the learned Executing Court on 30.01.2018 and make their offer. Parties shall be permitted to increase their bid(s). The Executing Court shall furnish its report about the bidding. It is made clear that if for some reason or the other, the bidding does not conclude on 30.01.2018; it will be open for the Executing Court to defer it for some other date, if circumstances so warrant. It will be the responsbility of the learned counsels to inform their respective parties about the present order. However, the learned Executing Court shall not finalise the same and the a report with details of highest bid (offer) shall be placed before this Court, for passing appropriate orders. Record of the Court below be sent back, with a direction that after drawing all the proceedings, as aforesaid, the same may be returned back to this Court. List this case on 20.02.2018, along with the report of the Executing Court."
(3.) Subsequently, on 01.05.2018, dismissing I.A. No.525/2018 as not pressed, following order was passed: "The respondent No. 3 - Narpat Singh has filed the present application, raising various objections about the order dated 13.12.2017 whereby an order to conduct inter se bidding by the learned Executing Court was passed. It is to be noticed that vide order dated 13.12.2017, instead of conducting open/public auction, this Court had directed the Executing Court to carry out inter se bidding between the co-sharers so that the disputed property remain in the hands of the present parties, who may have sentimental attachment with the same. Pursuant to the order dated 13.12.2017, the plaintiff-decree-holder - Hari Om Singh and the present appellants (sisters) had appeared before the Executing Court and offered their bid. The bid of the plaintiff-decree-holder (of Rs.21.00 lacs) was found highest. Though the order dated 13.12.2017 passed by this Court in the present appeal was passed after due service to the respondent No.2, but despite having filed power of Mr. Abdul Rauf, Advocate, nobody was present. The applicant-respondent No.3- Narpat Singh however appeared before the Executing Court on 09.02.2018, and he was informed about the date of auction, i.e., 12.02.2018. The applicant however did not present himself and the Executing Court received only one bid of the plaintiff - Hari Om Singh for Rs.21.00 lacs. ;