BHANDARI, C.J.—This is a special appeal under sec, 18 of the High Court Ordinance from the judgment dated 9th April, 1964 of Jagat Narayan J. in a case arising under sec. 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 23rd December, 1955 a decree was passed in a suit for specific performative of on agreement to sell two plots of land by the Civil Judge, Pali. The decree was in favour of Misrimal and Hanwantraj and against Tarachand, Birdichand and Roopchand. This decree was not drawn up in proper form, but the substance of the decree is that the defendants shall deliver possession of two the alas (plots mentioned in para 2 (b) of the plaint to the plaintiffs and that the defendants will execute a sale deed of these plots in favour of the plaintiffs, and that according to the agreement Ex. 1, the total sale-price of the plots in dispute is Rs. 4,000/- out of which Rs. 1,000/- has already been received by the defendants and Rs. 2545/7/* are due to the plaintiffs from the defendants which will be adjusted with interest at the rate of 6% per annum at the time of registration of the sale deed and in case the total amount does not make up of Rs. 4,000/-, the defendants will be entitled to get the balance from the plaintiffs at the time of registration of the sale-deed and the defendants will get the sale deed registered.

3. These two plots of land were situated in the town of Rani which was within the jurisdiction of Civil Judge, Pali when the decree was passed on 23rd December, 1955. Later on, the jurisdiction over the town of Rani was transferred to the Civil Judge, Sirohi. After such transfer, the decree-holders applied for execution of the decree on 19th March, 1956. The Civil Judge, Pali, did not transfer the decree so far as it related to the delivery of possession of the two plots of land for execution to the Civil Judge, Sirohi but proceeded to execute the decree. Possession over one of the plots of land was delivered by the Amin under order of the court to the decree-holder on 26th May, 1956 without any notice to the judgment-debtors. Possession over the second plot also was delivered on 22nd June, 1958. This time also no notice was issued to the judgment-debtors. Before delivery of the possession of the second plot of land, the judgment debtors had sold the second plot to Mohanlal. Mohanlal filed application under Order 21. rule 97 C.P.C. which was dismissed on 24th May, 1958. An application under sec. 151 C.P.C. was filed again by Mohanlal on 22nd July, 1958. In this application, the judgment-debtors were also made parties and they filed a reply on 25th July, 1958 supporting the case of Mohanlal. Mohanlals application u/s.151 C.P.C was dismissed by the Civil Judge, Pali on 23rd August, 1958. Both Mohanlal and Tarachand filed an appeal to the District Judge, Pali which was dismissed on 13th December, 1958. Both of them filed a second appeal to this Court which was dismissed in limine on 25th February, 1959. Thereafter notices were issued to the judgment-debtors to have the sale-deed executed. In reply to this, the judgment-debtors filed another objection application on 29th September, 1959, but it was not stated therein that the executing court had no jurisdiction to execute the decree. The sale-deed was registered on 14th November, 1959. Thereafter the judgment-debtors filed the objection applications that the executing court which had executed the decree for possession had no jurisdiction to execute it. This objection was dismissed by the executing court and so also their appeal. The judgment-debtors then filed a second appeal in this Court. The learned Single Judge took the view that even if the appellate court, Pali lacked jurisdiction in execution of the decree, the judgment-debtors were estopped from raising the question of jurisdiction of the appellate court because they did not raise it at the earliest possible opportunity, and also because the principle of constructive res judicata app

Click Here to Read the rest of this document