An execution application can be amended at any time, even beyond the limitation period, if the execution application is pending.

R. D. GATTANI, J.

( 1 ) THIS execution second appeal has been filed by one of the surety judgment-debtor and arises out of the following circumstances:-

( 2 ) ON 6-1-1946 an award in connection with a mortgage was given by an arbitrator against respondent No. 2 Trijugi Narain, principal debtor and the appellant Shri Rameshwar Lal and respondent No. 3 Suraj Narain as sureties in favour of respondent No. 1 the Commercial Cooperative Bank Ltd. , Ajmer (now in liquidation ). The award was for Rs. 7,769/7/-, which included the principal amount of Rs. 7,633/14/ -. The rate of the interest was 5 1/4 per cent per annum. The amount was to be realised by the sale of the immovable properties mentioned in the mortgage-deed and other properties of the main judgment-debtor and if the whole amount was not recovered from the properties of the judgment-debtor, the residue was to be recovered from the moveable and immovable properties of the two sureties.

( 3 ) EVENTUALLY the decree-holder filed the fourth execution application for the recovery of Rs. 9,096/8/- on 27-3-1957. In Column No. 10 of the application it was prayed that the amount may be realised by,-

(a) attachment of the movable properties of the judgment-debtors as pointed out by Administrator or his agent on the spot; (b) attachment and sale of the immovable properties specified in schedule a annexed and the sale-proceeds be paid to the decree-holder; and (c) by arrest and detention of the judgment-debtors Nos. 1 and 3 i. e. Trijugi Narain and Suraj Narain.

( 4 ) IT might be stated here that though this column refers to the immovable properties specified in Schedule a, the decree-debtor did not file any such schedule, In other words along with the application, the decree-holder did not file any list of the immovable properties. Proceedings in the executing Court (Civil judge, Aimer) went on for some time, but with no fruitful result. On 14-12-1963 the executing Court ordered the attachment of the immovable property of rameshwar Lal and Suraj Narain under Order 21. Rule 54 Civil Procedure Code upon the payment of process-fee and the filing of the list of the property. The case was to come on 22-2-1964, but the former order was not complied with. The lists were filed on 24-10-1964.

( 5 ) THREE lists covering six houses belonging to Rameshwar Lal and filed by the decree-holder are on record, but it cannot be said whether all the three lists were filed on the same day, as no date is given on either of the lists. However, the record shows that three houses mentioned as 8/634, 8/635 and 8/449 were attached. After again a lull for some time in the proceedings on 21-1-1967 rameshwar Lal appellant filed objections regarding the maintainability of the execution proceedings. The executing Court while rejecting other objections, upheld one of them regarding limitation. It held that the application for attachment and sale of the property of Rameshwar Lal having been made after expiry of twelve years from the date of the award, was not maintainable as time barred and the decree-holder was not entitled to get his application for execution amended after twelve years of the award. Thus the attachment of the property of the appellant was, therefore, set aside on 23-8-1969.

( 6 ) THE decree-holder preferred an appeal to the Court of District Judge, which being accepted on 19-12-1970 has led to the filing of this second appeal.

( 7 ) IT has been urged by the learned counsel for the appellant Rameshwar Lal that though judicial opinion of India in the matter involved in this appeal is divided, there is a direct authority of our own High Court, Ex. Second Appeal No. 11 of 1964, Mohan Lal v. Gulab Chand, D/- 14-3-1967 (Raj), and this Court will, therefore, may like to follow that authority.

( 8 ) ON the other hand it was contended by the learned counsel for the decree-holder that in the present case the question of amendment of the execution application under Order 21, Rule 17 Civil Procedure