Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:103042 Court No. - 9 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6384 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt. Kusuma Gaud And Another Respondent :- Shri Omprakash And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amish Kumar Srivastava,Ashutosh Kumar Mishra Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record. 2. This petition has been filed challenging order dated 21.03.2025 passed by Small Causes Judge/Additional Civil Judge (S.D.) Aligarh, in Executing Case No. 06 of 2004. 3. Brief facts of the case are that a decree for specific performance was passed in favour of the opposite party under which the opposite party was obliged to deposit the money within a time frame. Opposite party failed to deposit the money as directed by decree passed in favour of opposite party. Thereafter, the opposite party filed execution application. In the execution proceedings the opposite party deposited the amount without the leave of the court. During the pendency of execution application, the petitioners filed objection in the aforesaid execution proceedings that in view of Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, the execution cannot be proceeded. The said application of the petitioner was rejected and the revision filed against the said order has also been rejected. Against both the orders, the petitioner preferred Misc. Petition No. 13348 of 2024 (Smt. Kusuma Gaud and another versus Sri Om Prakash Gaud and others), which is still pending. In the aforesaid petition, no interim order has been granted by this Court. Now, the petitioner has moved an application before the executing court to stay the proceedings in view of the pendency of the petition referred above. The said application has been rejected and the revision has also been rejected. 4. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that since the matter is pending before this Court, the executing court ought to have stayed the proceedings. 5. It is admitted that no interim order has been granted by this Court in the pending petition. Since the original petition is pending, the proper course was to move application in the pending proceedings for grant of stay of the execution proceedings. 6. In view of the above, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter 7. The writ petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to move appropriate application in the pending proceedings. Order Date :- 3.7.2025 Ved Prakash (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Digitally signed by :- VED PRAKASH SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- VED PRAKASH SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- VED PRAKASH SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad