Pending appeal does not stay execution unless a specific stay is granted under civil procedure principles.

A pending appeal does not by itself stay execution of a decree under the U. P. Tenancy Act because the Code of Civil Procedure applies and Order 41 Rule 5(1) requires a specific stay. The limitation provision governs when execution may be sought, but it does not extinguish the decree-holder's right to execute before appellate finality. The expression "final decree" refers to the decree that ultimately attains finality in law; if no appeal is filed, finality arises on expiry of the appeal period, and if an appeal or revision is filed, finality follows the appellate or revisional decree. Execution is therefore not premature merely because proceedings are still pending.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether an application for execution of a decree under the U. P. Tenancy Act is premature merely because an appeal against the decree is pending; (ii) whether the expression "final decree" in the limitation provision means only a decree against which no appeal is pending.

Issue (i): Whether an application for execution of a decree under the U. P. Tenancy Act is premature merely because an appeal against the decree is pending.

Analysis: Section 243 of the U. P. Tenancy Act made the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure applicable to proceedings under the Tenancy Act. Order 41 Rule 5(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that an appeal does not operate as a stay of proceedings under the decree appealed from, and execution is not stayed merely because an appeal has been preferred. The limitation provision regulates the time within which execution may be sought, but does not create or take away the decree-holder's substantive right to execute the decree. Accordingly, the pendency of an appeal by itself does not render execution premature.

Conclusion: No. The decree-holder was entitled to proceed with execution notwithstanding the pending appeal unless execution was specifically stayed.

Issue (ii): Whether the expression "final decree" in the limitation provision means only a decree against which no appeal is pending.

Analysis: The words "final decree" were construed as referring to the decree which has become final in law. If no appeal is filed, finality occurs on expiry of the period of limitation for appeal. If an appeal or revision is filed, the original decree merges in the appellate or revisional decree, and the date of the final decree is the date of that decree. The limitation entry fixes the starting point for execution and does not bar an earlier execution application merely because the decree has not yet become final in that sense.

Conclusion: No. "Final decree" means the decree which ultimately attains finality, not that execution is barred until all appeals are exhausted.

Final Conclusion: The revisions were disposed of by holding that pendency of appeal does not by itself make execution premature, so the order stopping execution was set aside while the contrary order allowing execution was maintained.

Ratio Decidendi: A pending appeal does not stay execution unless a stay is granted, and a limitation entry referring to the "final decree" fixes the time for execution without depriving the decree-holder of the right to execute before finality is reached.

---