Neelam Sonkar vs Gowardhanlal Agrawal
2021 Latest Caselaw 7264 MP

      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                        FA No.630/2021
Indore, Dated : 10.11.2021
      Shri Sumit Samvatsar, learned counsel for the appellant.

      Shri Vinay Saraf, learned senior counsel with Shri Rijwan
Khan, learned counsel for the respondents.

Submissions were made on IA No.5987/2021, which is an application for stay, which has been submitted along with the appeal filed under Section 96 of the CPC.

By this IA, stay has been sought on the execution proceedings which have been initiated by the respondent.

Learned counsel for the respondent submits that this appeal is not maintainable because the respondent No.1 having already been dead, has not been shown as having died in the cause title and this appeal being filed against a dead person, is not maintainable.

To this, learned counsel for the appellant submits that it is a typographical error. He has drawn Court's attention to the impugned judgment dated 27.7.2021, wherein in the very title Govardhanlal's name has been mentioned but in the bracket it has also been mentioned that his name has been deleted in accordance with the order dated 22.8.2012.

Thus, it does appear that Govardhanlal's name has been mentioned by way of mistake. There are two respondents in this matter; (1) Govardhanlal and (2) Rajendra Kumar Agrawal, Govardhanlal having already died. This mistake needs to be corrected. The same be corrected.

However, execution proceedings have been initiated against the appellant and the case is listed for consideration before the trial Court on 11.11.2021. This execution proceeding has been sought to be stayed.

At this stage, learned counsel for the respondent submits that decree shall not be subject to execution till the next date. He seeks to file reply to application filed under Order 41 Rule 5 of CPC.

In view of the submissions of learned counsel for the respondent, the execution proceedings would not take place till the disposal of the application under Order 41 Rule 5 of CPC.

Let the reply be filed before the next date.

Matter be listed in the next week.

(Shailendra Shukla) Judge

Digitally signed by TRILOK SINGH SAVNER Date: 2021.11.10 17:38:58 +05'30'