CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints Minimum Wages Cannot Be Ignored While Determining Just Compensation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Re-Fixes Income of Deceased Mason, Enhances Interest to 7.5% 34 IPC | Common Intention Is Inferred From Manner Of Attack, Weapons Carried And Concerted Conduct: Allahabad High Court Last Date of Section 4 Publication Is Crucial—Error in Date Cannot Depress Market Value: Bombay High Court Enhances Compensation in Beed Land Acquisition Appeals Order 26 Rule 10-A CPC | Rarest of Rare: When a Mother Denies Her Own Child: Rajasthan High Court Orders DNA Test to Decide Maternity Acquittal Is Not a Passport Back to Uniform: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of Constable in NDPS Case Despite Trial Court Verdict Limitation Under Section 468 Cr.P.C. Cannot Be Ignored — But Section 473 Keeps the Door Open in the Interest of Justice: P&H HC Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness

Order XLI Rule 5 CPC: Pendency of appeal is not stay on Decree held by Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Top Court has stated that Order XLI Rule 5 CPC does not provide a stay based only on the filing of an appeal.

In this instance, the petitioner asked the High Court to order the District Magistrate to issue a No Objection Certificate so that an HSD/MS retail outlet dealership could be opened on the property.

However, the High Court rejected the argument after observing that an appeal against the petitioner's favouring decree had been filed in the High Court and had not yet been heard. The petitioner filed a High Court petition challenging this ruling.

The High Court was not justified in denying the plea, according to the Bench of Justices AS Bopanna and Hima Kohli.

The Bench ruled that, in light of the rules of Order 41 Rule 5 CPC, the mere filing of an appeal would not serve as a stay until it is listed and there is an interim order.

As a result, the court accepted the plea and instructed the DM to note the decree and provide the petitioner with a NOC within two weeks.

The court made it clear that the outcome of the appeal, which is still pending in the High Court, would continue to be a factor in this order.

Sanjiv Kumar Singh

vs

State of Bihar

Download Judgment

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Sanjiv-Kumar-Singh-versus-State-of-Bihar.pdf"]

Latest Legal News