!! 1 !! S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.235/1997 (Khalil Ahmed Vs. The Rajasthan Financial Corporation & Ors.) Date of order :: 04.11.2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr.Narendra Singh, for the appellant. Mr.S.G. Ojha ] Mr.Sanjay Nahar on behal of] Mr.P.K. Bhansali ] for the respondents. The application filed under Order 22 Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC, so also, the application under Order 22 Rule 9 alongwith Section 5 of the Limitation Act are allowed for the reasons mentioned in the applications. The amended cause title is hereby taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order dated 07th April, 1997. The learned trial court vide its order dated 07th April, 1997 dismissed the application of the appellant filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and 3 alongwith Section 94 read with Section 151 CPC. In this appeal on 21st May, 1998 while passing following order stay application was !! 2 !! disposed of:- “The basic objection of learned counsel for the appellant is that respondent-R.F.C. before putting the property to auction, has not got the property valued and in view of the judgment in the case of Mahesh Chandra the property was required to be valued. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that property is valued to the tune of Rs.50 lacs. The figure appears to be highly inflated. However, the figure if reduced by 30 lacs and an opportunity is given to the appellant that he may bring purchaser for Rs.30 lacs, then the appellant will make an application in this regard. Counsel for the R.F.C. has no objection if this opportunity is granted to the appellant. The appellant to make an endeavour that property at the price of Rs.30 lacs may be sold. One month's time is granted to make an effort to get the property sold at the above price by 20th June, 1998. He must take all necessary steps in this regard and submit the purchasers and purchase money to R.F.C. as required by R.F.C. In case, the appellant fails to bring any purchaser then respondent-R.F.C. will be at liberty to deal with the property in any manner as it deems fit and proper. It will also consider if any other proposal put forward by the appellant. With these observations, the stay petition is disposed of.” The above order is hereby made absolute and this appeal is disposed of with the direction to the trial court to decide the suit itself within a period of six months because suit is !! 3 !! pending since 1997 and this appeal is also pending since 1997. However, the stay order whatever is in existence till today shall remain in force till disposal of the suit. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS),J. A.K. Chouhan/- A.K. Chouhan/-