--Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S. 15 & Art. 181---Execution of decree---Limitation---Pendency of appeal---Effect---Appellant Bank sought execution of decree which petition was dismissed by Banking Court as barred by time--

 2022 CLD 1454

Ss. 19 & 22---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XLI, R.5---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S. 15 & Art. 181---Execution of decree---Limitation---Pendency of appeal---Effect---Appellant Bank sought execution of decree which petition was dismissed by Banking Court as barred by time---Plea raised by Bank was that execution was sought after decision in appeal---Validity---Mere filing of appeal was not to operate as stay of proceedings under decree appealed from---No embargo on rights of decree holder to initiate execution proceedings against judgment debtor, that too, from the date of accrual of right---When stay was granted by court regarding execution of decree, time of continuance of that order was excluded under S. 15 of Limitation Act 1908, from period of limitation for filing execution petition---No stay order was granted by High Court for suspending decree nor stayed of execution proceedings which could be excluded from period of limitation for seeking execution of judgment and decree passed by Banking Tribunal---Decree continued to maintain its identity and was capable of execution from the day the right accrued to appellant Bank---Appellant Bank failed to file execution within the period of limitation as contemplated in Art. 181 of Limitation Act, 1908, which commenced from the day the right accrued, therefore, execution petition was barred by time---Even under special procedure provided in S. 22 of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 operation of judgment and decree under execution could not be stayed nor execution proceedings were suspended by Appellate Court or Executing Court---Proceedings under execution were to go on and mere pendency of appeal did not itself operate as a stay---Appellant Bank sought execution of judgment and decree passed by Banking Tribunal and even if rule of merger was applied, appellant Bank was to seek execution of appellate judgment and decree, which was never sought---High Court declined to interfere in the matter as execution petition was not maintainable