1. We are of opinion that this Rule must be discharged. The Rule calls upon the opposite party to show cause why the proceedings directing the partition of the properties mentioned in the petition should not be stayed pending the hearing of the appeal preferred to this Court by the petitioner against a preliminary decree in a partition suit. It is contended by the learned pleader for the opposite party, that the Code of Civil Procedure, contains no provision authorising this Court to stay proceedings of this nature, and it is admitted by the learned counsel, who appears in support of the Rule that he cannot bring the case within any of the sections of the Code which relates specifically to a stay of execution of decrees. His contention is that on general principles the Court must have the authority which he asks us now to exercise.
2. In our opinion, however, our powers of interference with the proceedings of the Courts below are limited and defined by the Code of Civil Procedure, and in that Code we have not been referred to anything which would authorize our interference in the present case. The Rule is discharged with costs. We assess the hearing fee at three gold mohurs.
