1988 (8) TMI 441

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . The appellants before us moved an application under S.9 (2) of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909, seeking to issue notice under the said Act on the ground that the decree in O.S. No. 2307 of 1973 as modified in A.S. No. 635 of 1983 has not been satisfied. Though the suit is of the year 1973 a sum of Rs. 23,600 is due and payable towards mesne Profits. No doubt Civil Appeal No. 5728 of 19 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . 2. It is urged by Mr. R. Krishnaswami, learned Counsel for the appellants, that the learned Judge had committed an error in holding that merely because the appeal is pending before the Supreme Court it would be a bar for the issuance of notice under S.9(2) and should the respondent herein succeed in the Supreme Court it will bring down the image the respondent in the eyes of the public. All the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lone had been stayed and the pendency of the appeal before the Supreme Court will render the finality at large. Hence the order of the learned Judge has to be upheld. 4. We have given our very careful consideration to the above argument. In this case the basis on which the learned Judge proceeded is the stay of delivery of possession ordered by the Supreme Court on 9-1-1986. That order reads reads .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X