The main legal point established in the judgment is that a succession certificate is not necessary in execution petitions related to enhanced compensation in a land acquisition proceeding, as the reference under S.18 of the Land Acquisition Act does not constitute a proceeding for the recovery of a debt.

S. Sankarasubban, J.

In both these Civil Revision Petitions the same question arises and the petitioner is also the same and hence they are disposed of together.

2. These Civil Revision Petitions arise from the orders passed in execution in L.A.R. Nos. 115 and 116 of 1982. C.R.P. No. 210/98 arises from the orders passed in E. A. No. 318/97 in E.P.No. 209/1988 in L.A.R. No. 116/82 while C.R.P. No. 211/98 arises from the orders in E. A. No. 309/97 in E. A. No. 208/1988 in L.A.R. No. 115/82. The petitioners' predecessors-in-interest was one V.T. Chacko. His properties were acquired and some compensation was given. On reference, the Sub Court registered L.A.R. No. 116/82 and L.A.R. No. 115/82. The Sub Court enhanced the compensation. An award was passed for the enhanced amount in both these cases. Subsequently Chacko filed execution applications in both the L.A.Rs. Pending execution, Chacko died on 25.8.1997. The petitioners are his legal representatives. They filed applications to get themselves impleaded in the execution. But the applications were dismissed by the Court below on the ground that succession certificate was not produced. It is contended by the counsel for the petitioners that no objection was filed by the State with regard to the fact that the petitioners are the legal representatives of Chacko.

3. The question for consideration is whether a succession certificate is necessary in such execution petition. S.214(1)(a) & (b) of the Indian Succession Act states as follows:

"214. Proof of representative title a condition precedent to recovery through the Courts of debts from debtors of deceased persons:-(1)No Court shall

(a) pass a decree against a debtor of a deceased person for payment of his debt to a person claiming on succession to be entitled to the effects of the deceased person or to any part thereof, or

(b) proceed, up on an application of a person claiming to be so entitled, to execute against such a debtor a decree or order for the payment of his debt".

Under S.214(1) (a) when the suit is for recovery of a debt filed by the representatives of a deceased person, a succession certificate is necessary. Similarly, under S.214(1)(b) in an execution petition to execute the decree for recovery of a debt, a certificate is necessary. The question for consideration is whether in the present proceedings, a succession certificate is necessary.

4. The present proceedings come under S.214(1)(b) of the Act. The word 'debt' appears in both clauses (a) and (b). Hence same meaning should be given for the word which appears in both the Clauses. It cannot be said that under Clause (b) every decree for execution of recovery of money can be said to be a proceeding against a debtor. I am supported in this view by the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Anehakana Sur v. Abani Bhusan - AIR 1982 Calcutta 378 - which held as follows:

"The use of the expressions "such a debtor and his debt" in cl. (b) referred to hereinbefore make it abundantly clear that the "debt' referred to cl. (b) is referable to a "debt" as in cl. (a). In other words, unless the original claim in the suit which was the foundation for the decree was a debt'; cl. (b) would not be attracted. And we have already indicated that the original claim for damages on accounting could not come within the meaning of "debt'. Consequently, in order to sustain a proceeding in execution by the heirs of the deceased decree-holder, a succession certificate would not be necessary".

Thus, if the present decree comes within Clause (a), then necessarily under clause (b), a succession certificate has to be obtained. The land acquisition proceedings arise from a reference under S.18 of the Land Acquisition Act. In the reference, what is being done is to find out whether the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer is adequate and whether the parties before the Court are entitled to enhanced compensation.

5. A debt has been defined as an obligation to pay an ascertained su