CR No. 5819 of 2009 Karambir Singh Versus Ram sarup Present: Mr. R.N.Lohan, Advocate for the appellant. *** Mr.Ashwani Gaur, Advocate has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent. On the previous date the following order was passed:- “Learned counsel on instructions from the petitioner, who is present in Court, states that the petitioner is ready to deposit a sum of Rs. 1 lac by the 1st of November 2009, another sum of Rs. 1 lac by 13th of April, 2010,and the remaining amount with interest by 1st of October 2010. Notice of motion for 21.10.2009. Counsel for the petitioner prays for permission to serve the respondent by dasti process through his counsel before the executing court. Allowed.” Learned counsel for the respondent states that in fact the conduct of the petitioner does not suggest that he will honour this offer and if as a consequence of this offer the impugned order is set aside then in the event of the petitioner not depositing the future instalments as offered by him, serious prejudice would be caused to the respondent who is a 75 years old man. For this learned counsel for the petitioner has candidly stated that the impugned order may not be set aside. It may be kept in abeyance and in any case if a single default is made by the petitioner, the proceedings would start from the same stage as they are at present. I find this to be a fair solution. Consequently the trial court is directed to keep the execution proceedings in abeyance and the petitioner is held bound to make the payments as offered on 13th October, 2009. It is clarified that in the event of CR No. 5819 of 2009 -2- any default by the petitioner the execution proceedings would be revived from the same stage as they are at present but in case the entire amount is paid as per the above offer, the execution proceedings would be disposed of as having been satisfied. Petition stands disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE October 21, 2009 sunita