https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289399 A de facto manager of a Math can execute a decree for possession against adjudged trespassers even if the Mahant's title remains undecided, because the earlier adjudication had already confirmed the property belonged to the Math and that the decree-holder was in control of its affairs. The decree-holder's right to recover possession was therefore enforceable without first establishing formal title. The text also states that a stay of execution under Order XXI Rule 29 CPC can be granted only by the court competent under that provision; a stay passed by a court lacking such jurisdiction, and contrary to binding final directions under Article 141, is without jurisdiction and a nullity. en-us Mon, 07 Sep 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Jul 2020 11:55:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289399 A de facto manager of a Math can execute a decree for possession against adjudged trespassers even if the Mahant's title remains undecided, because the earlier adjudication had already confirmed the property belonged to the Math and that the decree-holder was in control of its affairs. The decree-holder's right to recover possession was therefore enforceable without first establishing formal title. The text also states that a stay of execution under Order XXI Rule 29 CPC can be granted only by the court competent under that provision; a stay passed by a court lacking such jurisdiction, and contrary to binding final directions under Article 141, is without jurisdiction and a nullity. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 07 Sep 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289399