Rule 5 of CPC : Rule 5: Stay by Appellate Court.

Explanation using Example

Example 1:

Scenario: Ramesh vs. Suresh

Ramesh won a civil case against Suresh in the trial court, and the court passed a decree ordering Suresh to pay Rs. 5 lakhs to Ramesh. Suresh, dissatisfied with the judgment, decided to appeal to the High Court.

Application for Stay: Suresh filed an application for stay of execution of the decree in the trial court, arguing that if he paid the amount immediately, he would suffer substantial financial loss, and he might not be able to recover the money if he won the appeal. He also provided security in the form of a bank guarantee for the amount decreed.

Court's Decision: The trial court, after considering the application, found that Suresh had shown sufficient cause and that he had applied without unreasonable delay. The court was satisfied with the security provided and ordered a stay of execution of the decree until the appeal was decided by the High Court.

Example 2:

Scenario: Meena vs. Anil

Meena obtained a decree from the trial court ordering Anil to vacate a property and hand it over to her. Anil decided to appeal the decision and filed an application for stay of execution of the decree in the appellate court.

Application for Stay: Anil argued that vacating the property immediately would cause him and his family substantial hardship as they had no alternative accommodation. He also stated that he had filed the appeal promptly and was willing to provide security for the due performance of the decree.

Court's Decision: The appellate court reviewed Anil's application and found that he had demonstrated substantial loss and had applied without unreasonable delay. Anil provided a security deposit as required. The appellate court granted a stay of execution of the decree, allowing Anil to remain in the property until the appeal was resolved.

Example 3:

Scenario: Priya vs. Raj

Priya won a case against Raj, and the court ordered Raj to demolish an illegal construction on Priya's land. Raj appealed the decision and sought a stay of execution of the decree.

Application for Stay: Raj claimed that demolishing the construction would cause him significant financial loss and that he had filed the appeal promptly. He also offered to provide a security deposit.

Court's Decision: The appellate court considered Raj's application and found that he had shown sufficient cause and had applied without unreasonable delay. However, Raj failed to provide the required security deposit. As a result, the court denied the stay of execution, and Raj was required to comply with the original decree and demolish the construction.

Example 4:

Scenario: Kavita vs. Manoj

Kavita won a case against Manoj, and the court ordered Manoj to pay Rs. 2 lakhs to Kavita. Manoj appealed the decision and sought a stay of execution of the decree.

Application for Stay: Manoj argued that paying the amount immediately would cause him financial hardship and that he had filed the appeal promptly. He also provided a security deposit.

Court's Decision: The appellate court reviewed Manoj's application and found that he had shown sufficient cause and had applied without unreasonable delay. The court was satisfied with the security provided and granted a stay of execution of the decree until the appeal was decided.

Example 5:

Scenario: Arjun vs. Neha

Arjun won a case against Neha, and the court ordered Neha to transfer ownership of a piece of land to Arjun. Neha appealed the decision and sought a stay of execution of the decree.

Application for Stay: Neha argued that transferring the land immediately would cause her substantial loss and that she had filed the appeal promptly. She also provided a security deposit.

Court's Decision: The appellate court considered Neha's application and found that she had shown sufficient cause and had applied without unreasonable delay. The court was satisfied with the security provided and granted a stay of execution of the decree until the appeal was resolved.