Simultaneous execution of one and same decree at two different Courts was maintainable
Citation
CDJ 2001 MHC 930
Ram Narayan Bhatted vs Vimala Jhavar and others
Head Note
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Order 21 Rule 22 – Absence of Notice – Maintainability of Decree – Appellant got assignment of decree as per the order in Application and filed execution petitions for prohibitory order to attach the shares – The Trial Court held that execution petitions were maintainable – Whether simultaneous execution of one and same decree at two different Courts was maintainable in absence of notice and permission not having been obtained from transferor Court, by decree holder-assignee –
Court Held – No specific provision of law which requires permission to be obtained from the Court for simultaneous execution of decree by decree holder before the Court which passed the decree and also before the Court to which decree has been transferred – Notice of the execution petition is stated in Order 21 Rule 22 of CPC and Order 39 Rule 12 of the Original Side Rules of the High Court and they do not also prescribe any notice to be sent to Defendant-judgment debtor – Hence, no necessity for Plaintiff-decree holder to obtain such permission from the Court for simultaneous execution and that therefore, order passed by the Trial Court is liable to be set aside – Appeals allowed.
(Paras 17, 18)
Cases Referred:
Venkatarami Reddy v. Rami Reddy , 1950 (1) MLJ 787,
Radheshyam and others v. Devindra , AIR 1952 Pat. 213.
Omprakash Judgment Debtor v. Tahera Degam and others , AIR 1955 All. 382,
Bethia Venkanna v. Sait Chunilal Moolchand Registered Firm Kakinada by Managing Partner Chuilal , AIR 1961 AP 63,
Bhagwan Das v. Gomti Bai and another AIR 1962 All. 619,
Venkatarami Reddy v. Rami Reddy , 1950 (1) MLJ 787
Comparative Citations:
2002 (1) CTC 48, 2002 (1) MLJ 239,
Court Held – No specific provision of law which requires permission to be obtained from the Court for simultaneous execution of decree by decree holder before the Court which passed the decree and also before the Court to which decree has been transferred – Notice of the execution petition is stated in Order 21 Rule 22 of CPC and Order 39 Rule 12 of the Original Side Rules of the High Court and they do not also prescribe any notice to be sent to Defendant-judgment debtor – Hence, no necessity for Plaintiff-decree holder to obtain such permission from the Court for simultaneous execution and that therefore, order passed by the Trial Court is liable to be set aside – Appeals allowed.
(Paras 17, 18)
Cases Referred:
Venkatarami Reddy v. Rami Reddy , 1950 (1) MLJ 787,
Radheshyam and others v. Devindra , AIR 1952 Pat. 213.
Omprakash Judgment Debtor v. Tahera Degam and others , AIR 1955 All. 382,
Bethia Venkanna v. Sait Chunilal Moolchand Registered Firm Kakinada by Managing Partner Chuilal , AIR 1961 AP 63,
Bhagwan Das v. Gomti Bai and another AIR 1962 All. 619,
Venkatarami Reddy v. Rami Reddy , 1950 (1) MLJ 787
Comparative Citations:
2002 (1) CTC 48, 2002 (1) MLJ 239,
Comments
Post a Comment