no. 3 herein vide registered sale deed dated 17.07.2009 for a sum of Rs.3.9 Lakhs. 3.4. on 29.01.1990, the present appellant/judgment debtor moved an application for restitution under Section 144 CPC on the ground that the original decree having been varied, substantially, the execution sale deserves to be set aside and reversed by way of restitution. The appellant/judgment debtor also deposited the entire decretal amount (as finally decreed by the appeal court) in the Trial Court. As noted above, the courts below have concurrently rejected the appellant/judgment debtor’s application for restitution basing the reasoning that he had not deposited any amount in court, when the suit was6 originally decreed and the decree was put in execution, and not even a part of the amount which was finally decreed by the appeal court was deposited, hence, the principle of restitution is not invokable. 4. Mr. D.N. Goburdhan, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant/judgment debtor has