Back
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
State of Jharkhand through the Collector of Palamu – Appellant
Versus
Kishore Prasad Gupta, S/o. Late Ram Awatar Prasad Gupta – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
Prayer
1. The petitioners has filed the instant miscellaneous petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order 10.08.2022 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Div.)-VI, Palamau at Daltonganj in Execution Case No.14 of 2008, whereby and whereunder the petition filed on behalf of the Judgment Debtor (petitioners herein) was rejected wherein a plea was taken that against the decretal amount of Rs.5,63,692/-, a cheque of Rs.4,81,519/- has been deposited in the Court and the remaining amount of Rs.82,173/- being under the sales tax, income-tax and royalty head payable by the contractor has been deducted, hence the payment may be considered to be paid in full to the satisfaction of decree and warrant of attachment may be recalled.
Facts
2. The brief facts of the case as per the pleadings made are as under.
3. The plaintiff to the suit filed a Money Suit for holding him entitled for an amount of the work executed by him. The decree finally was passed by the competent court holding the plaintiff entitled for a decretal amount of Rs.5,63,692/-. The decree having not been executed, in consequence thereof, Execution Case has been fi
The executing court is bound to execute the decree as per its terms, and the jurisdiction under Article 227 is limited to correcting gross abuses of jurisdiction, not to re-evaluate findings of fact ....
The executing Court cannot go behind the decree and must execute it according to its tenor, and cannot entertain objections to the decree's correctness in law or on facts, unless it is a nullity or p....
The executing court's limited powers at the execution stage, the prohibition on questioning the validity of the decree, and the requirement to execute the decree as made.
Objection to execution of decree – Running a separate miscellaneous proceeding under Section 47 of CPC is a misuse of process of court.
Unconscionable laches can bar relief in petitions under Article 227; courts will not interfere unless there are grave abuses or derelictions.
The executing court is bound by the decree's terms and cannot entertain objections that do not pertain to jurisdiction, even if the decree is allegedly erroneous.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
