The main legal point established in the judgment is the applicability of the limitation period for the execution of a decree, which is determined based on the date of the decree of the appellate Court.

1. This is a revision petition against the order dated 1-10-1998 passed by the trial Court dismissing the objections filed by the judgment-debtors in the execution proceedings and ordering issuance of warrants of possession.

2. The facts which are relevant for the decision of the present revision petition are that Harbhajan Singh, decree-holder, had filed a suit for possession against the judgment-debtors. The said suit filed by the plaintiff decree-holder was decreed by the trial Court on 18-9-1984, regarding possession of the room in dispute and the appeal filed against the same was dismissed by the Additional District Judge on 10-6-1986. Subsequently, the decree-holder filed execution petition on 15-11-1997 for execution of the Civil Court decree in his favour. Against the said execution petition, the judgment-debtor Hari Singh filed an objection petition alleging therein that the property sought by the decree-holder in the execution proceedings had already been given to the judgment-debtor vide settlement dated 26-9-1986 and now the decree-holder had no right to claim the property. It was alleged that the judgment-debtor had complied with all the terms and conditions of the compromise dated 26-9-1986. It was further alleged that even otherwise, execution petition had become barred by time, having been filed after more than 13 years of the decree passed by the trial Court. This objection petition was contested by the decree-holder by filing a written reply alleging therein that after the decision of the case by the Additional District Judge, there was an agreement dated 26-9-1986 between the parties. However, the judgment-debtor did not comply with the said compromise and the same was not acted upon and had lost its validity. It was alleged that the judgment-debtor failed to perform the stipulated conditions and after waiting for full 11 years, the decree-holder was compelled to file execution petition in order to save the limitation.

3. After hearing both the sides and perusing the record, the executing Court, vide order dated 7-10-1998, dismissed the objection petition of the judgment-debtor and ordered the issuance of warrants of possession. Aggrieved against the same, Hari Singh, judgment-debtor, has filed the present revision petition.

4. Notice of motion was issued, Counsel for the parties have been heard.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner-judgment-debtor has submitted before me that the execution petition filed by the decree-holder was barred by limitation and was not execution. It was submitted that the trial Court decree was dated 18-9-1984, whereas the execution petition was filed on 15-11-1997, after a gap of more than 13 years and that the limitation for filing the execution was only 12 years. Reliance was placed on Diwan Singh V/s. Om Parkash, 1998 (2) RCR 423, Bharat Nidhi Ltd. V/s. M/s. Sehgal Brothers, 1979 RLR 199 and Radhey Sham Jaiswal V/s. Smt. Ram Dulari Devi, 1996 (5) JT SC 620.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the decree-holder respondent submitted that against judgment and decree dated 18-9-1984 passed by the trial Court, the defendants had filed an appeal, which was decided by the Additional District Judge on 10-6-1986, dismissing the appeal. It was submitted that the decree passed by the trial Court merged with the decree of the appellate Court and it was only the decree of the appellate Court which was executable and that being so, it is the decree of the appellate Court which is to be executed and as such the execution petition filed within 12 years of the decree passed by the appellate Court would be within limitation. Reliance was placed on Ramji Dass V/s. Tilak Raj, 1988 CCC 588 (P and H). It was further submitted that by virtue of the agreement dated 26-9-1986, the judgment-debtor had acknowledged the existence of the Civil Court decree against them and that being so, the execution petition filed on 15-11-1997 would be within limitation from the date of the acknowledgemen