An application for execution barred under the old Limitation Act cannot be revived by the new Limitation Act.

JUDGMENT - MOHTA, J:- This second appeal has been referred for disposal to a Division Bench in view of the importance of the point involved.

2. The appellants here are the legal representatives of original judgment debtor against whom a money decree in the sum of Rs. 3,370 was passed in Civil Suit No. 97-B of 1955 on 19-8-1955. The decree-holder/ respondent filed an execution petition for realisation of the decretal amount on 29-6-1956, but the same was dropped on 18-10.1956. The decree-holder kept silence and took no steps to execute the decree till 20-12-1966 when the fresh execution bearing No. 40 of 1967 was filed. Vide order dated 12-1-1967, the Executing Court dismissed the Darkhast as having been barred by time. Appeal under section 47, Civil Procedure Code was preferred before the Assistant Judge, Nagpur, who relying on the decision of the learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of (The Presidency Industrial Bank Ltd. v. The Hindustan Leather Industries Ltd.)1 came to the conclusion that the Darkhast was not barred by time as it was within 12 years of the passing of the decree in terms of Article 136 of the new Limitation Act, 1963. Consequently, the first appeal was allowed. The present second appeal is directed against the said decision given by the learned Assistant Judge.

3. Shri Choudhari, the learned counsel for the appellants, brought to our notice the following relevant portion from the judgment given in Industrial Bank's case (supra), on the basis of which the first appeal was allowed:-

The next objection of the judgment-debtors and the legal representatives of Vijayakar, the deceased judgment-debtor No.2, is that the execution application is time barred. The decree was passed on 12th December 1952. The present execution application was filed on 29th October 1964 within 12 years of the passing of the decree. Article 136 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963, provides a period of 12 years for the execution of any decree from the time when the decree becomes enforceable. The present Limitation Act has considerably changed the law and while under the old Act an application for execution had to be made within a period of three years or, if the decree was registered, within a period of six years, under the present Act even the first execution application can be filed within a period of 12 years. The execution application is, therefore, in my opinion, not barred by the Law of limitation as against the judgment debtors.

It was contended that the aforesaid decision needs reconsideration as it ignores salient features of the new Limitation Act. It seems to us that the learned counsel is correct.

4. Before the new Act which was brought into force with effect from 1-1-1964, the law relating to the limitation for execution was contained in section 48 Civil Procedure Code and Articles 182 and 183 of the old Limitation Act 1908. Article 183 related to execution of decrees and orders passed by Royal Charter and the Supreme Court with which we are not concerned in this matter. Relevant Article 182 reads as under:-

Description of Period of Time from which perio begins

application. limitation. to run.

182. For the execution Three years; or 1. The date of decree or order,

of a decree or order of where a certi- or

any Civil Court not fied copy of the 2. (where there has been an provided for any Article decree or order appeal) the date of the final 183 or by section 48 of has been regis- decree or order of the Appel- the Code of Civil tered, six years. late Court, or the withdrawal

Procedure, 1908. of the appeal, or

3. (where there has been a review of judgment) the date of the decision passed on the review, or

4. (where the decree has been amended) the date of amendment, or

5. (where the application next hereinafter mentioned has been made) the date of the final order passed on an application made i

Click Here to Read the rest of this document