Madhya Pradesh High Court

Anand Kumar vs Liladhar on 16 July, 2025

Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar

Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar

                                                                    1                                      SA-2979-2019
                                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                        AT INDORE
                                                            SA No. 2979 of 2019
                                               (ANAND KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs LILADHAR AND OTHERS )



                           Dated : 16-07-2025
                                 Shri Sameer Anant Athawale - Advocate for the appellants.

                                 Shri Pritam Singh Kushwaha - Advocate for the respondent no.1.

Ms Harshita Ranawat - Advocate for the respondent(s) No. 2,3,4,8 &

10. [R-4].

Heard on I.A. No. 8120/2019, an application under Order XLI Rule 5

of CPC.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the respondent/defendant no.1 - Leeladhar had filed civil suit for declaration of title, recovery of possession and mesne profit. The trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 08.01.2016 passed in RCS No. 27A/2013 granted the decree as under:

"It is ordered and decreed that: िनणय अनुसार वाद अपना वाद मा णत करने म सफल रहा है । फलत: करण म िन नानुसार जयप पा रत कया जाता है -

"24. उपरो व ेषण के आधार पर वाद अपना वाद मा णत करने म सफल रहा है । फलतः करण म िन नानुसार जयप पा रत कया जाता है :-

(क) यह घो षत कया जाता है क ाम झरिनया, तहसील शुजालपुर, जला शाजापुर थत वाद त भूिम सव . 8/2 रकबा 1.318 हे . व सव . 135/3 रकबा 2.027 हे ., कुल रकबा 3.345 हे . भूिम के वाद व ितवाद . 9, 10, 11 येक 1/5-1/5 अंश व ितवाद . 3 लगायत 8 संयु प से 1/5 अंश के भूिम वामी ह। (ख) ितवाद . 1 व 2 को िनदिशत कया जाता है क वे उ वाद त भूिम का आिधप य अ वलंब वाद व ितवाद . 3 लगायत 11 को स प। (ग) वाद व ितवाद . 3 लगायत 11 संयु प से ितवाद . 1 व 2 से म यवत लाभ के प म वाद तुित दनांक से िनणय दनांक तक व िनणय दनांक से आिधप य ाि दनांक तक पए 30,000/- (तीस हजार मा ) ितवष क दर से म यवत लाभ ा करने के अिधकार ह।

(घ) ितवाद . 1 व 2 वयं व वाद का वाद यय वहन करगे। (ड.) अिधव ा शु क मा णत होने पर माण प अनुसार अथवा िनयम 523 यवहार यायालय िनयम, 1961 अनुसार, जो भी कम हो यय म जोड़ जावे। तदानुसार जयप बनाया जावे। "

2 SA-2979-2019

Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the trial Court, Anand Kumar and Balwant Singh (present appellants) filed appeal before the Additional District Judge, Shujalpur in RCA No. 141/2016. The learned Additional District Judge Shujalpur affirmed the judgment and decree of the trial Court and rejected the appeal vide judgment dated 03.10.2019. The present second appeal is filed assailing the concurrent finding of declaration of title and relief of possession alongwith mesne profit in favour of respondent no.1.

Learned counsel for the appellants referring to the substantial questions of law formulated vide order dated 03.05.2024 contends that in addition to the substantial questions of law, another issue relating to

limitation to file the suit deserves consideration. Admittedly, the appellants are in possession of the suit property. The impugned judgment and decree are erroneously passed in favour of the respondent no.1, which is subject matter of challenge in the present appeal. If the appellants are dispossessed in execution of the impugned judgment and decree, they will suffer substantial loss and serious prejudice. Therefore, the execution of impugned judgment and decree be stayed pending the hearing of present appeal.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents opposed the application and submits that the trial Court and the first Appellate Court concurrently held that the respondent - Leeladhar is the title holder of the suit property inherited from his mother. The appellants have failed to establish their title or right to possess the suit land before the trial Court as well as the first Appellate Court. Therefore, prejudice would be caused to the respondent, if

3 SA-2979-2019 they are deprived the fruits of long drawn litigation.

Heard, both the parties and perused the record. This appeal is admitted on substantial question of law formulated vide order dated 03.05.2024. The appeal deserves to be heard on merit. If the appellants are dispossessed during pendency of the appeal, they may suffer substantial irreparable loss.

Considered.

The Supreme Court in the case of Atma Ram Properties (P) Ltd. Vs. Federal Motors (P) Ltd. reported in (2005) 1 SCC 705 held that the appellate Court while passing the order of stay under Rule 5 of Order XLI of CPC, has jurisdiction to impose such reasonable terms, as in its opinion would reasonably compensate the decree holder for the loss occasioned by the delay in execution of decree for the reason of stay order, in the event of appeal being dismissed.

Considering the overall circumstances and in view of relative prejudices, in the considered opinion of this Court, the operation of impugned judgment and decree needs to be stayed, subject to compliance with certain conditions.

Consequently, I.A. No. 8120/2019 is allowed with the following directions:

1. The execution of impugned judgment and decree dated 08.01.2016 and 03.10.2019 shall remain stayed during pendency of this appeal, subject to the appellant furnishing personal bond of Rs.

5,00,000/- and a surety bond of the same amount to the satisfaction of

4 SA-2979-2019 the trial Court as security for due performance of the decree, as may ultimately be binding upon him and for compliance with following conditions:-

(a) The appellant shall furnish personal bond and the surety bond within a period of fifteen days, failing which, the stay on execution of decree shall stand vacated.

(b) The appellant shall continue to pay the mesne profit determined by the first Appellate Court and the trial Court i.e. Rs.

30,000/- per annum, which shall be enhanced by 10% every year during pendency of the present appeal, failing which the stay on execution shall stand vacated automatically.

(c) The appellant shall pay the outstanding amount of the mesne profit within three months of this order, to be calculated from the date of judgment of the trial Court, failing which, the stay on execution of the judgment and decree shall stand vacated automatically.

(d) The amounts of mesne profit, so deposited shall be kept in fixed deposit in a nationalized bank bearing reasonable interest. The entire amount shall be disbursed as per the outcome of present appeal.

(e) The appellant shall keep track of hearings of appeal and mark his presence on every date of hearing, either personally or through his representatives.

(f) The appellant shall ensure early disposal of the appeal

5 SA-2979-2019 in compliance with the directives of the Court and shall not attempt to delay the proceedings.

List the matter for final hearing in due course.

(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR) JUDGE