Lack Of Boundaries In Sale Deed Not Fatal To Title If Plot Number & Parent Title Are Sufficiently Identifiable: Calcutta High Court Terror Perception Of Underworld Justifies Delay In Invoking MCOCA; Purely Civil Disputes Can Metamorphose Into Criminal Offence: Bombay High Court Identical Wills Executed By Spouses On Same Day Not Necessarily 'Mutual Wills' Restricting Power Of Alienation: Delhi High Court Written Notice Not Mandatory For Revoking Permission Under Section 41 Presidency Small Cause Courts Act: Gujarat High Court Wife Cannot Maintain Complaint Against Husband Under Senior Citizens Act; Not Intended For Spousal Disputes: Karnataka High Court Mere Presence At Scene Or Facilitation Without Intent To Aid Crime Does Not Amount To Abetment: Delhi High Court Offences Under IT Act Punishable With 3 Years Imprisonment Are Bailable Under Section 77B: Kerala High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail In KCA Data Theft Case Premature Release Can't Be Denied Citing Section 435 CrPC If Sentence Under Central Act Is Already Served: Madras High Court Suppression Of Higher Qualification To Secure Job Reserved For Lower Education Is Foundational Fraud, Sympathy Has No Role: Supreme Court MBBS Admissions | Candidate Using NIOS Marks To Meet 50% Eligibility Cannot Claim State Govt School Quota: Orissa High Court High Court Cannot Exercise Article 227 Power To Strike Off Plaint When Remedy Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC Exists: Madras High Court Section 69 IEA | Onus On Propounder To Lead Secondary Evidence & Remove Suspicious Circumstances If Attesting Witnesses Are Dead: Telangana High Court

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