1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.732 OF 2011 (Jagannath s/o Ramjathan Mishra vs. Farari Baba Kuti Ellichpur) __________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Shri B.N. Jaipurkar, Advocate for the petitioner. -------- CORAM : R.M. SAVANT, J. DATED : JUNE 20, 2011 The above petition takes exception to the order dated 11/2/2010 passed by the 3 rd Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Achalpur by which application (Exh. 43) filed by the petitioner herein for stay of the execution proceedings was rejected. The petitioner is a judgment debtor, who has suffered a decree in Regular Civil Suit No.4/1988. The decree holder sought to execute the decree by filing regular execution proceedings No. 45/2007 for executing the decree dated 14/9/2007. The said decree was initially opposed on 2 the ground that Regular Civil Suit No.317/2007 was pending in respect of the property in question, which was the subject matter of the execution. The matter was carried to this Court by way of Writ Petition No. 1115/2009 and this Court directed the Executing Court to consider the import of the said Regular Civil Suit No. 317/2007 on the execution of the decree and remanded the matter back to the Executing Court for that purpose. The Executing Court by the impugned order has rejected the said application (Exh. 43) filed by the petitioner seeking stay of the execution proceedings. The Executing Court has observed that the said suit No. 314/2007 (wrongly mentioned as 317/07) is directed against the Revenue Authorities and though the subject matter is the same property, the reliefs sought are against the Revenue Authorities and, therefore, the same cannot be an impediment in executing the decree, which is in favour of the decree holder. The Executing Court, therefore, did not find it fit to stay the execution of the decree and consequently, rejected the application (Exh. 43). 3 In my view, the reasons given by the Executing Court are unexceptional and do not warrant any interference. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. JUDGE khj