High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Food Corporation Of India & Others v. M/S Vindhyawasini Trading Company - WRIT - C No. 36113 of 2007  RD-AH 13629 (7 August 2007)
Civil Revision No. 36113 of 2001
Food Corporation of India and others ......... Petitioner
M/s. Vindhyawasini Trading Company . .... .... ..... ..... Respondents
Hon'ble Janardan Sahai, J
A money decree was passed against the petitioners Food Corporation of India. The decree was put into execution. The petitioners filed objections under Section 47 CPC alleging that the decretal amount was not correctly calculated in the execution application. The objections were dismissed by the executing court by order dated 17.11.2005. Against that order a revision was filed by the petitioners which was dismissed by the impugned order dated 6.4.2007. It is submitted by Sri Satish Chaturvedi counsel for the petitioners that after the trial court dismissed the objections under Section 47 CPC, the petitioners had filed a second appeal against the decree itself and in the said second appeal a stay order has been passed by this Court on 1.5.2006 by which execution of the decree has been stayed on the condition that the petitioners deposit the entire decretal amount within a period of two months with the trial court, half of which can be withdrawn by the plaintiff-respondents without furnishing security and the remaining half after furnishing adequate security.
It is submitted that in pursuance of the said order dated 1.5.2006 the petitioners have deposited the entire decretal amount within the time granted by this court and therefore the decree cannot be executed and the revisional court has erred in law in dismissing the revision. The revision which has been disposed of by the District Judge by order dated 6.4.2007 was directed against the order rejecting the objections under Section 47 CPC. The subject matter in issue before the revisional court was regarding the calculation of the decretal amount. The revisional order therefore does not suffer from any error as nothing has been shown to demonstrate that the decretal amount calculated by the court was erroneous. The submission which the petitioner is raising arises out of the subsequent order passed by this court in second appeal by which time has been granted to the petitioner to deposit the decretal amount. If the executing proceeds despite the stay order passed in the second appeal. It would be open to the petitioners to file fresh objections and it will be open to the executing court to examine whether the petitioner has complied with the conditions mentioned in the stay order passed by this court. No ground for interference has been made out. With these observations the revision is Dismissed.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.