( 1 ) THIS Appeal arises out of the order passed by the 8 Judge of the City Civil Court Ahmedabad dismissing the execution application No. 237/64 filed by the appellant who is the decree-holder. The execution in question is of a decree passed by the High Court of Bombay on its Original Side for the sum of Rs. 19 770 with interest and costs in Civil Suit No. 674/47 which was for the amount of Rs. 13 210 The said decree is passed on 16th March 1951 The same was transferred by the High Court of Bombay to City Civil Court Ahmedabad for execution and pursuant to that order of transfer the appellant-decree holder has filed this execution application in the City Civil Court Ahmedabad on 28 April 1964 The total amount for the realisation of which the execution is filed comes to Rs. 30 270 nps. During the course of the execution the decree holder has taken into attachment the judgment debtors immoveable property situated at Kalupur in the city of Ahmedabad.

( 2 ) TO this execution application judgment-debtors who are respondants in this appeal have taken various objections. Their main contention is that the High Court of Bombay had no jurisdiction to pass any decree against them on 16th March 1951 in view of the fact that on that date the jurisdiction over the subject-matter of the suit was with the City Civil Court Bombay. Another contention which was raised by the respondents before the executing court was that even if it is believed that the High Court of Bombay had jurisdiction to pass the decree sought to be executed it had no jurisdiction to entertain any execution application in view of the specific provisions made in sec. 12 read with sec. 3 and 4 of Bombay City Civil Court Act 1948 (Bombay Act XL of 1948) (hereinafter referred to as the Principal Act ). The respondents judgment debtors also contended that the execution application filed by the decree-holder pursuant to the transfer of decree to the City Civil Court Ahmedabad is also barred by time and that the High Court of Bombay had no jurisdiction to transfer the decree to City Civil Court Ahmedabad for the purpose of execution.

( 3 ) ALL these contentions weighed favourably with the learned Judge of executing Court with the result that he dismissed the execution application with costs and raised the attachment over the properties of the respondents. This order was passed by the learned Judge on 28th April 1966 and it is against this order that the original decree-holder has preferred this appeal.

( 4 ) IN this appeal Miss Shah who appeared on behalf of the appellant contended that the High Court of Bombay had jurisdiction to pass the decree sought to be executed in view of the fact that when original Civil suit no. 1674/47 was filed in the said High Court City Civil Court Bombay was not in existance. It came into existance during the pendency of that suit on 16th Aug. 1948 but at that time the City Civil Court Bombay had jurisdiction to receive try and dispose of only these suits and proceedof civil nature which did not exceed Rs. 10 0 value. It was pointed out that since the suit which was filed by the decree holder was for the realisation of 13270/it was not liable to be transferred to the City Civil Court Bombay under sec 18 of the Principal Act. It was further pointed out that subsequently during the pendency of the suit the pecuniary jurisdiction of City Civil Court Bombay was raised to suits and proceedings of civil nature not exceeding Rs. 25 0 in value but since this pecuniary jurisdiction was raised prospectively from 20th January 1950 the date on which the notification which raised that pecuniary jurisdiction came into force the proceedings of the present suit were not liable to be transferred to the City Civil Court Bombay and therefore even after the raising of the pecuniary jurisdiction of the City Civil Court Bombay to the limit of Rs. 25 0 the High Court of Bombay did not cease to have jurisdiction over the matter. According to Miss Shah there