Prathvi And Anr vs Bootaram And Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 6752 Raj

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 6752 Raj
Judgement Date : 5 March, 2021

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Prathvi And Anr vs Bootaram And Ors on 5 March, 2021

Bench: Arun Bhansali

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JODHPUR

S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 69/2004

Prathvi And Anr

----Appellant Versus Bootaram And Ors

----Respondent

For Appellant(s) : Mr. A. Khatri.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. D.S. Thind.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Order 05/03/2021

The matter comes upon an application filed by the appellants

under Section 151 CPC seeking extension of interim orders dated

29.01.2004 & 11.03.2019.

Submissions have been made that the interim orders were

granted by the court staying the dis-possession of the appellants

from the land in dispute on conditions indicated therein.

However, based on judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in

Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. v. Central Bureau of

Investigation: (2018) 16 SCC 299, the executing court is insisting

for getting extension of the interim orders granted by the court

and that on account of the said judgment in the case of Asian

Resurfacing of Road Agency (Supra) it is alleged that the

appellants are being harassed by the respondents as well.

This Court by order dated 22.01.2021 in M/s Abhinav Gold

International And Ors. v. Ramswaroop: SBCFA No.299/2014 has

already opined that the order in the case of Asian Resurfacing of

Road Agency (Supra) has no application to cases where already

the decree has been passed and the suit is not pending with the

(2 of 3) [CFA-69/2004]

trial court and the said order cannot be applied to pending

execution application.

It was inter-alia observed in the case of Abhinav Gold

International (supra) as under:-

"When it was pointed out to learned counsel for the appellants that the direction in the case of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency (supra) has apparently no application to the facts of the present case, wherein the trial is not pending, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the executing courts are insisting for getting extension of the interim order even in execution cases, in view of the case of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency (supra).

In the case of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court, inter-alia, directed as under:-

"37. .... .... .... ..... Mandate of speedy justice applies to the PC Act cases as well as other cases where at trial stage proceedings are stayed by the higher court i.e. the High Court or a court below the High Court, as the case may be. In all pending matters before the High Courts or other courts relating to PC Act or all other civil or criminal cases, where stay of proceedings in a pending trial is operating, stay will automatically lapse after six months from today unless extended by a speaking order on above parameters. Same course may also be adopted by civil and criminal appellate/revisional courts under the jurisdiction of the High Courts. The trial courts may, on expiry of above period, resume the proceedings without waiting for any other intimation unless express order extending stay is produced."

(emphasis supplied)

A perusal of the above direction indicates that the same is confined to matters, which are pending before the trial court i.e. the suits wherein trials are pending, the same has no application to the cases where the suits have concluded and decree has been passed.

                                                                   (3 of 3)                                     [CFA-69/2004]

                                                         Merely      because         execution          proceedings

pertaining to the decree is also pending before the trial court, the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is not applicable to the execution proceedings. In view thereof, there is no necessity to order for extension of the interim order, which is already unlimited."

In view thereof, the application filed by the appellants is

disposed of with the above clarification that the interim orders

granted by this court on 29.01.2004 and 11.03.2019 shall remain

in force during pendency of the appeal and that the same would

not come to an end based on the directions in the case of Asian

Resurfacing of Road Agency (Supra).

Another application has been filed under Order XXII Rule 4 &

9 CPC inter-alia indicating that respondent No. 1/3 has died during

pendency of the appeal.