RANAWAT, J.—In view of the importance of the questions involved therein, a Division Bench of this Court has referred to this case to a larger Bench of this Court for decision.

2. On the 24th of March, 1947 an ex parte decree was obtained by Radheyshyam and Radha Kishan against the firm of Sawai Modi Basdeo Prasad and Ramprasad of Dholpur for Rs. 2498/6/- plus costs in the court of the Civil Judge, Jaipur City. The defendants at that time were the subjects of the then Dholpur State. The suit was entertained in the court of the Civil Judge, Jaipur, as the cause of action arose within the limits of the jurisdiction of that court. The defendants did not enter appearance and the proceedings against them were taken ex parte. At that time the Jaipur State and the Dholpur State were two different Indian States and for the purposes of execution the decrees of the courts of one State were considered to be decrees of the courts of a foreign State in the other. As the decree in this case was a personal decree passed by a court of the Jaipur State against the defendant who, being a subject of the then Dholpur State not residing within the State of Jaipur, was a non-resident foreigner, it could not be regarded by the then Dholpur State courts to have conclusively determined the rights of the parties within the meaning of set. 13 of the Civil Procedure Code and as such it could not be executed there at that time. The Dholpur State merged into the Matsya Union on the 18th March, 1948 and subsequently the Matsya Union became part of the Rajasthan State from the 15th of May, 1949. On the 23rd of May, 1949 the decree-holders applied to the court of the Civil Judge, Jaipur, for transfer of their decree the court of the Civil Judge, Dholpur, for execution and the decree was accordingly transferred on the 24th of May, 1949. The Civil Judge, Dholpur, sent the decree for execution to the court of the Munsif, Dholpur. The judgment-debtors appeared before the Munsif and raised an objection that the decree was not executable in the territories of the former Dholpur State, as the judgment-debtors were not subject to the jurisdiction of the Jaipur court at the time of the passing of the decree. In other words the objection was that as the decree was a personal decree of a foreign court against a non-resident foreigner who had not submitted to the jurisdiction of that court it could not be considered to be a decree of a competent court in the meaning of sec. 13 of the Civil Procedure Code. The learned Munsif disallowed this objection on 29th October, 1949 but on appeal the Civil Judge, Dholpur, on the 20th of December, 1949 accepted the objection of the judgment-debtor and held that the decree was not executable within the territories of the former Dholpur State as it could not be regarded to be a decree passed by a competent court because it was a personal decree of a foreign court against a non-resident foreigner who had not submitted to the jurisdiction of such court. The decree-holders filed an appeal in this court against the aforesaid order of the Civil Judge. This appeal was at first heard by a Single Judge, who referred it to a Division Bench on the 29th of September, 1950 and the case was again referred to a larger Bench on the 5th of December, 1952. The following two points arise in this appeal:

(1) Whether the court of the Civil Judge, Dholpur, had no jurisdiction to execute in the State of Rajasthan the decree passed by the Civil Judge of Jaipur on the 24th of March, 1947 before merger, which was a personal decree against the judgment-debtor, who was a subject of the then Dholpur State and who had not submitted to the jurisdiction of the then Jaipur State court is not executable within the territories of the former Dholpur State, on the ground that the decree not being one of a competent court in the meaning of sec. 13(a) of the Civil Procedure Code is a nullity?

(2) Whether the court of the Civil Judge, Dholpur, had no jurisdiction to execute the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document