The High Court at Aurangabad held that a conditional stay granted earlier in the matter died out due to the non-deposit of the decretal amount by the State respondent, allowing the applicants to proceed with execution proceedings.
The applicants are at liberty to initiate execution proceedings to recover the decretal amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1 19-CA-14818-17
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
19 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14818 OF 2017
IN FA/3340/2016
MOHAN NARAYAN MORE VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Ajeet B. Kale AGP for Respondents : Mr. S.J. Salgare
WITH CA/14819/2017 IN FA/3338/2016 WITH CA/14820/2017 IN FA/3339/2016 WITH CA/14821/2017 IN FA/3341/2016
CORAM : K.K. SONAWANE, J.
DATED : 11TH DECEMBER, 2017.
Order :-
2 19-CA-14818-17
period. But there was no response received from respondent -State nor any decreetal amount came to be deposited. In such circumstances the order of stay granted by this Court dated 29th July, 2016, lost its force and died out.
Sd/-
[ K. K. SONAWANE ] JUDGE
MTK.
Mohan Narayan More
The State of Maharashtra
K. K. Sonawane
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
