JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the parties on stay petition. 1. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that appellant is in possession of the property since last 30 years and since the appeal has already been admitted, therefore, during the pendency of the appeal, the appellant is entitled to remain in possession of the property and the respondents have no right to dispossess the appellant illegally without taking the course of law. 2. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the plaintiff-appellant's suit for specific performance of contract was dismissed by the trial court, therefore, the appellant has no right to remain in possession of the property. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the respondents that the respondents have already filed the suit for eviction against the plaintiff and, therefore, respondents are entitled to take possession by lawful means. It is also submitted that the mesne profit for the land in dispute can go to more than Rs. 2 lacs per annum, therefore, in case, any stay order/injunction order is granted in favour of the appellant then a cash security condition may, be imposed upon the appellant. 3. Looking to the facts of the case that the suit of the plaintiff was dismissed, but there is no relief in favour of the respondents is in existence, the right to take possession by lawful means is still sub-judiced before the competent court and, therefore, the respondents today has no existing right to take possession of the property in view of the fact that respondents admitted that appellant is in possession of the property. 4. Looking to the peculiar facts of this case, I deem it proper that the injunction application of the appellant be allowed and the respondents are restrained from dispossessing the appellant from the land in dispute till the decision of this appeal on condition that appellant shall furnish security for the payment of Rs. 40,000/- per annum before the trial court by 15th April of every year till the decision of this appeal taking note of the fact that there was a condition of furnishing security for Rs. 25,000/- before the trial court during the pendency of the suit is an admitted fact. 40,000/- per annum before the trial court by 15th April of every year till the decision of this appeal taking note of the fact that there was a condition of furnishing security for Rs. 25,000/- before the trial court during the pendency of the suit is an admitted fact. The respondents will be free to move application for modification of the stay order after getting decision from the revenue court with respect to the recovery of possession against the appellant. 5. The stay petition is disposed of as mentioned above.Stay Petition Disposed of as above. *******