IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.344 of 2010 MD. SHAHABUDDIN son of late Mushtaque Ahmad, Resident of Kaghzi Mohalla, Post Office, and P.S. Siwan Town District Siwan...Defendant...appellant in the court below...petitioner. Versus 1. AINULLAH KHAN son of Late Md. Yunush Khan, resident of Mohalla Siwan, Naya Bazar, Hospital Road, District Siwan 2. Shahida Umar wife of Merajuddin Ahmad, resident of Kaghzi Mohalla P.O. and P.S. Siwan Town, District Siwan...plaintiff respondets Ist. Set ......opposite party Ist set. 3. Imteyaz Ahmad son of late Mushtaque Ahmad 4. Bibi Mazida Khatoon wife of late Mushtaque Ahmad 5. Khurshed Fatma 6. Kaniz Fatma 7. Anis Fatma Sl. Nos. 5 to 7 are daughters of late Mushtaque Ahmad and Serial Nos. 3 to 7 are resident of Kaghzi Mohalla, P.O. & P.S. Siwan Town, Distrcit-Siwan...Defendants ...Respondents 2nd Set ... O.Ps 2nd Set. . ----------- 2 16.12.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The present revision application has been filed against that part of the order dated 09.02.2010 passed in Eviction Appeal No. 02 of 2010 by learned Additional District Judge, FTC-2, Siwan, whereby the prayer made, on behalf of the petitioner for stay of further proceeding in Execution Case No. 4 of 2010 pending in the court of learned Munsif Ist, Siwan for realisation of arrears of rent Rs.18,075/- and cost of the suit being Rs.1,454/- has been rejected, though other part of the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner has been allowed and it has been directed that the petitioner shall not be evicted from the suit premises till disposal of the appeal. The plaintiffs-opposite party 1st set brought Eviction Suit No. 31 of 1990, which was decreed by judgment and decree dated 19th December 2009 holding therein that the defendant (petitioner) is the 2 tenant of the suit premises and decree of eviction was passed against him. It was further held that the plaintiff was entitled to have arrears of rent as also the cost of the suit. Defendant-petitioner, being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and decree, preferred Eviction Appeal No. 02 of 2010 in the court of learned District Judge, Siwan and as per submission, the appeal is still pending. In the meantime the decree-holder –plaintiff levied Execution Case No 04 of 2010, which is pending. The petitioner filed stay petition before the learned appellate court with a prayer for staying the further proceeding in the Execution case and for other incidental relief, which has been partly rejected and party allowed by the impugned order as referred to in the Ist para of this order. After having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the materials available on record, this court does not find any legal infirmity or material irregularity in the order impugned. Accordingly the present civil revision application is dismissed. M.Rahman ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J )