LAWS(ORI)-1984-9-22

RAJANI KANTA PADHI Vs. B. KAMESWAR SUBUDHI

Decided On September 14, 1984
Rajani Kanta Padhi Appellant
V/S
B. Kameswar Subudhi Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANT -judgment. -debtor is the Petitioner in this Civil Revision.

(2.) AGAINST the decree sought to be executed, the Petitioner filed First Appeal No. 42 of 1980 which is pending in this Court. The decretal amount is roughly Rs. 25,900/. Plaintiff filed Execution Case No. 6 of 1980 for recovery of the decretal amount. In the First Appeal Defendant applied for stay of execution of the decree under Order 41, Rule 5, Code of Civil Procedure. Under the Rules of this Court, Registrar is to exercise the power under Order 41, Rule 5, Code of Civil Procedure. On 28 -7 -1980, the Registrar finally stayed the further proceedings of the Execution Case subject to the condition that the judgment debtor furnishes security to the extent of the decretal amount within six weeks to the satisfaction of the Executing Court. This period was extended from time to time and the last extension was till 5.3.1981 by which time the bond was to be furnished. These extensions were granted on the basis that the draft bond was filed in the Executing Court for approval after its satisfaction. On 17 -9 -1980, the decree -holder filed his objection to the draft security bond. Documents in support of the security bond were filed on 31.10.1980. As stated earlier, the learned Registrar of this Court extended time by 15 days on 18.2.1981 to execute the security bond to the satisfaction of the Executing Court.

(3.) ON 22 -6 -1981, the Petitioner filed a petition in the First Appeal in this Court to set aside the report of the Executing Court and to direct an enquiry as to the sufficiency of the security offered. On 25 -11 -1981, the learned Registrar vacated the order of stay after perusal of the report of the Subordinate Judge and after hearing both the parties on account of non -compliance with the order of this Court. The petition dated 22 -6 -1981 does not seem to have been considered that day. Petitioner filed a petition on 26 -11 -1981 to put up the matter before the Bench. On 27 -11 -1981, the learned Registrar heard counsel for both parties on the petitions dated 26 -11 -1981 and 22 -6 -1981. He passed the following order: