Requirement of filing of certificate of non-satisfaction is not a condition for assumption of jurisdiction, but merely procedural.

Against the appellant in this appeal, the respondent had obtained a decree in C.S. No. 53 of 1946 of the Penang High Court. After obtaining a certificate of non-satisfaction from that Court, the decree-holder-respondent sought to execute the decree by attaching certain properties within the jurisdiction of the District Court, Nagapattinam. The judgment-debtor contended that the decree of the High Court of Penang cannot be executed by the District Court and that the execution petition is barred by limitation. The learned District Judge held that since the High Court of Penang and the Supreme Court of the Federated Malay States have been notified by the notification of the Government of India as Courts in a reciprocating territory, the District Court could proceed with the execution by reason of section 44-A of the Civil Procedure Code. Another contention was that since the decree sought to be executed was passed on 4th January, 1954, that date would be the starting point of the period of limitation. The learned District Judge accepted the plea that as, it was not shown that the High Court of Penang had been established by Royal Charter, Article 183 of the Limitation Act would not apply. He next proceeded to hold that though the decree was passed by the High Court of Penang on 4th January, 1954, an appeal had been taken to the Supreme Court which received final disposal only on 23rd February, 1960. Limitation had to be computed only from that date and applying Article 182 (2), he concluded that the execution petition which had been presented before the District Court even on 3rd December, 1959, was not barred by limitation. The learned District Judge accordingly directed attachment proceedings to be taken.

It is against this judgment of the District Court of Nagapattinam that the present appeal has been filed.

After the filing of this appeal, Mr. K. Rajah Iyer, learned Counsel for the appellant-judgment-debtor, obtained an adjournment in order to enable him to apply to the Supreme Court of Malaya to set aside the decree of 1960, that is, the decree dismissing the appeal against the decree passed by the High Court of Penang. The Supreme Court of Malaya pronounced judgment on the 21st of October, 1963, as a result of which the order made by it on the 23rd of February, 1960, purporting to dismiss the appeal against the judgment and decree of the Penang High Court now under execution, was set aside. In order to appreciate the effect of this judgment, certain further facts have to be stated.

The judgment and decree obtained by the respondent was on the 4th of January, 1954. The judgment-debtor filed an appeal in the Supreme Court and sought for stay. By an order of the Supreme Court dated 31st of May, 1954, stay was granted on condition that the judgment-debtor gave security for the taxed costs;of 5453 and odd dollars and further security for the costs of the appeal in a sum of 1,000 dollars, such security to be furnished on or before the 30th day of June, 1954. Apparently, a sum of 500 dollars was paid by the judgment-debtor, which was directed to be received by the Court as security for the costs of the appeal. The terms of the conditional order were not complied with. By a further application, the judgment-debtor sought for extension of time, and time was so granted lor compliance with the conditions till the 31st day of July, 1954, and it was further ordered by the Supreme Court that " if the appellant made default in giving such security by the date aforesaid, the appeal would be dismissed with costs. Thc appellant-judgment-debtor did not avail himself of the extension of time and did not comply with the condition, but apparently no formal order of dismissal of the appeal was made at that time.

On the 27th of November, 1954, the decree-holder moved the Supreme Court. In his affidafit, he stated that since the appellant had failed to comply with the conditions, the appeal stood dismissed and he sought in that applicat