S-28 IN TIIE IIIGII COURT OF DELIII AT NEW DEIAII I-X.P. '108/2007 M/S ANANT RAJ AGI_,,'NCIE,'S ..... Decree Holder Throuoh : Sh. Necra' Malhotra. Advocate. versus DI'l-J-11 DF^V I ," LOPMENT A UTHORITY & ANOTI-11"'R ..... Judgement Debtors Through : Nerno. CORAM: IIONTLE MR—JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA 1311AT 0 R 1) E R 16.07.2010 The Decree Holder seeks execut.ion of a decree which made the award of the ir Arbitrator Rule ofCourt. It is stated that the judgment and decree of this Court has been carried in appeal by the Judgment Dcbtor/original defendant. The Division Bench has apparently directed deposit of' the principal dcci-cetal arnount and has stayed the execution. Having regard to these circumstances and the further I -act that dhe ultirtiatc entitlei-nerit of the Decree ]folder would be in accordance with the decision of the Division Bench 'udLrucrit. tl_: Court is ofthe opinion that the present procceding, should be suli tably disposed of' with liberty to the Decree Holder to approacli the Court in the light of the final orders of the Division Bench. In the circurnstarices. it is open to the Decree Holder to approach the Court with a fresh execution, having re o ard to the final orders of the ])]vision Bench. It is clarified that the present execution was filed well within the period of limitation which would entitle the Decree Holder to approach tile Court; this would obviate the plea of limitation ifit is raised in future. by the JUdoment Debtor. Ex. Pet. Z7, 308/2007 is disposed ofin terms ofthc above directions. L"a4o,^^ S. RAVINDRA BII.A'I-,.J it) LY 16,2010 'ajk' (Y0 Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified