The procedure laid down under Order 21, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is supplemental to the mandate laid down under Section 47 of the Code and cannot be in derogation of it. Once the procedure under Order 21, Rule 2 is exhausted, it is not legally permissible to fall back on Section 47 of the Code to determine the genuineness of alleged payments.

MAITHILI SHARON, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision petition is directed against the Order, dt. 12-8-1994 in E. P. No. 49 of 1992 in O. S. No. 68 of 1991 passed by the Principal District Munsif, cuddapah.

( 2 ) THE relevant facts leading to this revision petition may be summarised thus: the respondents filed O. S. No. 68 of 1991 in the Court of Prl. District Munsif, cuddapah against the petitioner for recovery of a sum of money on the basis of a pronote. The suit was decreed on 25-2-1992 for a total sum of Rs. 34,733/ -. Afterwards, E. P. No. 49 of 1992 was filed by the respondents for the realisation of the decretal amount and the property of the Judgment Debtor i. e. revision petitioner herein, was attached in execution. The revision petitioner - Judgment debtor raised two defences, namely. , (1) The attached property did not belong to her, but in fact, it belonged to her husband; and (2) she had already made two payments Rs. 7,000/- and Rs. 5,000/- the stamped receipts are Exs. B-l and b-2 respectively. The learned Executing Court did not agree with the defences taken by the Judgment Debtor and allowed the E. P. by the impugned order. Hence, this revision petition.

( 3 ) I have heard the learned counsel on both sides at length and have also carefully gone through the record of the case.

( 4 ) AT the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he waived the first defence taken by the petitioner before the executing Court that the attached property belonged to her husband, as according to her, it was the husband who could have filed objections in this regard. His vehement argument on the second defence is that in view of Section 47 of the Code of Civil procedure, (for short the Code ), the execting Court should have enquired the genuineness or otherwise of the above referred to two payments viz. , rs. 7,000/- and Rs. 5,000/-, through Exs. B-1 and B-2 respectively, and not solely on the basis of the provisions engrafted under Order 21, Rule 2 and sub- rule (2-A) of the Code. In other words, he has argued that the above Rules of the code do not exhaust the remedy available to the Judgment Debtor in facts and in Law; the complete enquiry in this regard has to be made under Section 47 of the Code, which lays down that all questions arising between the parties to the suit shall be determined by the executing Court. On the basis of this argument, he has submitted before me that the impugned order deserves to be set aside and the case deserves to be remanded to the executing Court to enquire into the genuineness of the above two documents viz. , Exs. B-1 and B-2, in the light of the mandate given u/s. 47 of the Code. He has also relied upon a pronouncement of the Supreme Court in M. P. Shreevastava vs. Mrs. Veena.

( 5 ) ON the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents has argued that the provisions laid down under Rule 2 and sub-rule (2-A) of Order XXI of the code give complete procedure to be followed in regard to the payment or adjustment of the decretal amountmade outof Courtand Section 47 of the Code has nothing to do in this case.

( 6 ) I have seriously considered the arguments advanced by both the learned counsel and gone through the pronouncement of the Supreme Court cited supra. For a proper appreciation of the matter in hand, it would be appropriate to reproducehere Section 47 (1) and Order 21, Rule-2 of the Code, as amended by the Amendment Act, 1976:"section47 (L) All questions arising between the parties to the suit in which the decree was passed, or their representatives, and relating to the execution, discharge or satisfaction of the decree, shall be determined by the Court executing the decree and not by a separate suit. (2 ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (3 ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ""order 21 Rule 2. (1) Where any money payable under a decree of any kind is paid out of Court or a decree of any kind i

Click Here to Read the rest of this document