1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR LPA NO. 436 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 4044 OF 2009 (Mahavir Moharilal Sharma & Ors. vs. Smt. Sukhwantidevi Paramsukh Mishra & Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & F.M. REIS, JJ. OCTOBER 14, 2009. Heard Shri Pathan, learned counsel for the appellants and Mrs. Joshi, learned counsel for the respondents. Shri Pathan, learned counsel states that the appeal under clause 21 of the C.P. & Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949, is pending before the Additional Collector, Amravati, and hence permission to issue notice for termination of tenancy granted under clause 13(3) of Rent Control Order, has not yet become final. He, therefore, states that the decree for possession cannot be executed. Mrs. Joshi, learned counsel states that the decree for possession has attained finality and it was never challenged. She further points out that no interim order was operating during the pendency of writ petition and possession of the appellant was, therefore, illegal and wrongful. 2 The other grievance made by Mrs. Joshi, learned counsel is that the appellant has not paid anything towards occupation charges or towards cost of judgment and decree and he is enjoying the premises free of cost. Shri Pathan, learned counsel states that the statement being made is incorrect but then only to show his bonafides, the appellant will provisionally deposit some amount without prejudice to his contention in the matter. As the appeal under clause 21 of Rent Control Order is pending, it is apparent that the decree for possession cannot be executed against the tenant. The possession, therefore, needs to be protected. Accordingly, we direct that the decree of possession passed by the Small Causes Court at Amravati against the appellant shall not be executed till the appeal under Clause 21 is decided by the appellate authority. However, this order is subject to the appellant depositing with his landlord provisionally an amount of Rs.10,000/- by 30th October 2009. The amount so deposited shall be accepted by the landlord without prejudice to his contentions and legal rights in the matter. Similarly, the payment shall not prejudice or affect the rights and contentions of present appellant. The accounts can be finally worked out by Competent Court. 3 If the amount is so deposited, the interim order granted by this Court, protecting possession of the appellant shall continue to operate during the pendency of the appeal. The appellate authority shall endeavour to decide the appeal before it as early as possible and in any case by 28th February 2010. It is made clear that the Executing Court shal not proceed further with the execution till 30th October 2009. Letters Patent Appeal is thus partly allowed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE *GS..