1. ' AHMED KHAN, J.---C.M.A. No,414 of 2006 has been filed for arrest MUNIB and detention of judgment-debtor in jail as according to learned counsel for decree-holder the judgment-debtor is not satisfying the decree notwithstanding the fact that High Court Appeal against the decree has been dismissed.
2. ' On the other hand Mr. Salim Salam Ansari' submits that an ex parte decree was passed against judgment-debtor and after dismissal of appeal the matter is taken to the Hon'ble Supreme Court, where it is sub, judice. He raised legal objection to the prayer of the applicants that judgment- debtor cannot be detained in prison till the requirement of section 51 as well as rules 37 to 40 of Order XXI are fulfilled. In this respect he has relied upon PLD 2000 Karachi (sic) and PLD 2000 Lahore 290.
3. ' Learned counsel for the applicant/decree-holder has admitted that there is no security against the loan which was granted to judgment-debtor nor he is aware as to whether any property stands in the name of judgment-debtor or he has sold out any such property after filing of suit. He submits that detention is only to pressurize the judgment-debtor for payment of money outstanding against him.
4. ' Heard the learned counsel. It seems that simple detention of judgment-debtor will not serve the purpose towards realization of the decretal amount as apparently, there is no allegation which comes within the ambit of section 51, C.P.C. While judgment-debtor is representing himself through an Advocate and has been pursuing the case and now the appeal is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In such a situation, no purpose will be served by the application made by the applicant nor it is maintainable in the circumstances of the case. Keeping in view the authorities cited by the learned counsel and legal position the application is dismissed.
5. ' Learned counsel for the decree-holder may search for the property of judgment-debtor through other sources towards satisfaction of the decree and approach this Court.