Calcutta High Court
Civil Procedure and EvidenceCivil Law

Execution was temporarily restrained pending consideration of the appeal-restoration application.

ABHIRAM KOLEY vs MALINA MODAK

Calcutta High CourtJUDGMENT: October 12, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Execution was temporarily restrained pending consideration of the appeal-restoration application.. ABHIRAM KOLEY vs MALINA MODAK. Calcutta High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The opposite party obtained a decree in Title Suit No. 314 of 2021, and the petitioner-defendant filed Title Appeal No. 77 of 2023. In that appeal, the First Appellate Court stayed execution subject to payment of a lump sum and monthly occupational charges. The appeal was later dismissed for default, and the petitioner’s application to restore it remained pending.

Source reference: para. 5–7

The petitioner stated that he had complied with the payment conditions and sought protection from execution while the restoration application was pending; the opposite party argued that the revision had become infructuous because the appeal had been dismissed.

Source reference: para. 3–4, 7
02

Issues

Whether the revisional application should remain pending when the appeal in which the challenged stay order was made had been dismissed for default.

Source reference: para. 4, 8

Whether execution should be temporarily held in abeyance while the petitioner’s restoration application remained pending.

Source reference: para. 7–9
03

Law Applied

The Court referred to its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

Source reference: para. 8–9

The Court’s approach was that, although dismissal of the underlying appeal removed the basis for keeping the revision pending, interim protection could be granted in the interests of justice where a restoration application remained pending.

Source reference: para. 8–9
04

Reasoning

Because Title Appeal No. 77 of 2023 had been dismissed for default, the Court considered there to be no point in keeping the Article 227 proceedings pending.

Source reference: para. 8

However, the petitioner’s restoration application had not yet been decided, and the petitioner claimed to have complied with the payment directions; execution in the meantime could prejudice him if the appeal were restored. The Court therefore granted limited, time-bound protection and requested that the First Appellate Court decide the restoration application promptly.

Source reference: para. 7, 9
05

Holding

The Court disposed of the revisional application.

It directed the executing court to hold its hands in Title Execution No. 38 of 2023 until November 30, 2026, and requested the First Appellate Court to take up and dispose of the restoration application within a week after the ensuing puja vacation.

Source reference: para. 9–10
Calcutta High Court

Original Court PDF

ABHIRAM KOLEYvsMALINA MODAK

Calcutta High Court · October 12, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment