IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.904 of 2008 PRAMOD SINGH @ PUNNE SINGH Versus DAYA DEVI & ANR ----------- 3 07.07.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner that since the impugned decree sought to be executed in the Execution Case was pending consideration before this Court in a Second Appeal the Court below ought to have not proceeded in the execution case is wholly misconceived. The provisions of Order XXXXV Rule 5 makes it clear that as to at what stage the Executing Court has to stay its hand while executing a decree which is pending consideration in an appeal. There being no stay of the decree by this Court in the Second appeal, the Court below rightly proceeded to execute the decree by taking steps for delivery of possession. There is no error in the impugned order and this Civil Revision application is accordingly dismissed. BCJ (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)