Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 15882 MP
Judgement Date : 28 May, 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DUPPALA VENKATA RAMANA
ON THE 28 th OF MAY, 2024
MISC. PETITION No. 2276 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
SMT TARANA KHAN W/O SHEIKH JABID KHAN, AGED
ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSE WIFE R/O
V I L L A G E MAHUAJHALA AT PRESENT ALIAGANJ
MUHALLA TEHSIL BIJAWAR DISTRICT CHHATARPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI ANOOP KUMAR SAXENA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. RUKSANA BEGUM W/O YUNIS KHAN R/O WARD
NO 04 ALIGANJ MUHALLA MASZID KE PASS
BIJAWAR TEHSIL BIJAWAR DISTRICT
CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SMT. KAMLA DEVI DIXIT W/O CHHOTELAL DIXIT
R/O WARD NO. 04 NEAR ALIGANJ MUHALLA
KUAN KE PASS BIJAWAR TEHSIL BIJAWAR
DISTRICT CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
This petition coming on for admission. this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
This petition has been filed for staying the further proceedings of Execution Case No.EXA/01/2024 pending before the First Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bijawar, District Chhatarpur and another relief sought for to decide the pending application under Order 41 Rule 5 of CPC in RCA No.37/2023 before the first Additional District Judge, Bijawar expeditiously in accordance with law.
When the matter came up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction basing on the agreement of sale dated 07.02.2020. The respondent/defendant entered appearance and filed a counter claim seeking for relief of recovery of possession of the suit house/subject property and after adjudication, the trial Court dismissed the suit of the plaintiff and allowed the counter claim. Challenging the judgment of trial Court, plaintiff preferred an appeal before first appellate Court and filed an application under Order 41 Rule 5 of CPC to stay the execution of judgment and decree of the trial Court, pending application the respondent/defendant filed execution case
No.EXA/01/2024 for recovery of possession. Since the Order 41 Rule 5 of CPC is not disposed off by the learned first appellate Court, the executing Court may order for delivery of possession of the subject property and it causes hardship, therefore, the plaintiff/petitioner filed this miscellaneous petition for seeking direction to the trial Court to dispose off the application filed under Order 41 Rule 5 of CPC expeditiously and till the disposal of the above application, stay the further proceeding in execution case pending before the trial Court, in accordance with law.
Perused the petition, it finds that there is no merit in the petition to give such direction. Accordingly, this petition is disposed off with the direction that the the first appellate Court to decide the application filed under Order 41 Rule 5 of CPC expeditiously as early as possible.
With the above direction, this petition is disposed off.
(DUPPALA VENKATA RAMANA)
JUDGE vibha
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!