Judgments: Govindamjachari, J.-

The appellant was the first judgment-debtor in O.S No 16 of 1932 on the file of the District Court, Vizagapatam, which on transfer was re-numbered as O.S. No. 6 of 1936 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Chicacole. The suit was one for partition and consequential reliefs by a member of a joint Hindu family. The final decree which 1s dated 31st March, 1930, provided inter alia for the payment of Rs. 4,515 by the first defendant personally and by defendants 2 and 3 out of their family properties towards mesne profits from the year 1924 till date of suit (31st August, 1932) with interest thereon at the rate of six per cent, per annum from date of plaint and also for the payment similarly of three sums of Rs. 530 each towards mesne profits for the years 1932-33, 1933-34 and 1934-35 with interest on the respective amounts at six per cent, per annum from 1st March, 1933, 1st March, 1934, and 1st March, 1935. Costs of the suit were also awarded to the plaintiff in a sum of Rs. 1,019-15-0. As the three sums of Rs 530 together amounting to Rs. 1,590 were profits which arose subsequent to suit and on which therefore no court-fee was paid with the plaint there was a direction that the plaintiff should pay Rs. 157-7-0 towards the court-fee payable on that amount. The plaintiff applied for execution of the decree as to past mesne profits and costs in E. P. No. 59 of 1939 which was filed on 1st July, 1939. He made a reservation in the execution petition that as regards mesne profits due to him from the year 1932 up to the end of 1934 he “will take out execution proceedings later on” The execution petition was finally dismissed on 25th August, 1941, with a direction that the attachment should continue for one month. On 23rd September 1941, the decree-holder again applied for execution in respect of past mesne profits and costs with a similar reservation as to mesne profits subsequent to suit Certain properties of the judgment-debtors were sold in execution on 27th March, 1944. The judgment-debtors deposited Rs. 9,503 under Order 21, rule 89 of the Civil Procedure Code and on 6th July, 1944, the sale was set aside, part satisfaction of the decree was entered up, the execution petition was struck off and the attachment was raised. Meanwhile in E.P. No. 92 of 1943 dated 25th March, 1943, the decree-holder applied for delivery of properties allotted to him but this petition was dismissed on 17th February, 1944.

On 24th April, 1944, the decree-holder applied in E.P. No. 65 of 1944, out of which the present Letters Patent Appeal has arisen for recovery of Rs. 2,756-9-6 being the amount of subsequent mesne profits and interest thereon and the court-fee payable in respect of the former amount, by bringing the immoveable properties of judgement-debtors 1 and 3 to sale. On 24th April, 1944, the decree-holder also applied in E.P. No. 264 of 1944 for extension of time for payment of the court-fee payable in respect of subsequent mesne profits and on the Court granting him the permission asked for he paid the court-fee on that day itself. In E.P. No. 65 of 1944 the principal contention was that it was barred by limitation. Upholding this contention the learned Subordinate Judge of Chicacole dismissed the petition but on appeal to this Court, Chandrasekhara Aiyar, J., held that the petition was in time The present Letters Patent Appeal is against the latter finding and the only question that has been argued before us is one of limitation.

The first step in the argument of Mr. Narasaraju, the learned Advocate for the appellant is that even in respect of that portion of the decree which directs the payment of Rs. 1,590 towards the mesne profits subsequent to suit, limitation began to run on the date of the decree itself notwithstanding that execution of that part of the decree could not be sought without the previous payment of the court-fee payable on it by virtue of the provisions of section 11 of the Court-F

Click Here to Read the rest of this document