SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(Online)(All) 7

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
, J
Kedar Ram v. Additional District Judge II Ballia and Others
Writ Petition | Misc Appeal No. 252 of 1988



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sri V. K. S. Chaudhary
For the Respondents: Sri L. P. Singh

Transferee of property cannot execute a decree without specific assignment; execution applications barred by time must be dismissed.

Headnote:(A) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order XXI Rule 16 - Execution proceedings - Substitution application by non-assignee of decree - Court held that a transferee of property does not entitle him to execute a decree unless the decree is specifically assigned - Durbal Ram's application to be substituted in execution dismissed based on non-assignment of decree and inapplicability of Limitation Act. (Paras 8, 10, 14, 15)

(B) Limitation - Execution application - Dismissal of Durbal Ram's execution application as beyond 12 years from dismiss of Second Appeal reaffirmed through case law discrepancy noted. (Paras 6, 11)

Findings of Court:
Application for substitution of Durbal Ram was invalid as the required conditions under the CPC were not met.

Issues: Whether non-decree assignee can file application for execution?

Ratio Decidendi: Court emphasized that mere transfer of property does not constitute a transfer of the underlying decree, thus Durbal Ram lacked standing to revive execution proceedings.

Result: Writ petition allowed; orders of the lower courts set aside.

Table of Content
1. overview of original suit and appeals. (Para 2 , 3)
2. claims and counterclaims regarding execution rights. (Para 4 , 5)
3. explanation of rights under cpc for execution. (Para 8 , 10)
4. limitations on execution applications and their implications. (Para 11 , 12)
5. court grants petition; lower court judgments set aside. (Para 14 , 15)

1. Heard Sri V. K. S. Chaudhary, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner and Sri L. P. Singh, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 3 to 6.

2. By this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 18-12-1990 passed by the II Additional District Judge, Ballia in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 252 of 1988 and the order dated 24-12-1985 passed by the Munsif, Ballia on Miscellaneous Application filed in Execution case o. 58 of 1967.

3. Facts in brief which emerge from the pleadings of the parties are;--
Original suit No. 481 of 1953 was filed by Baldeo against Puranwasi Ram for possession of Khandahar situated in Mohalla Gorayasthan Rasra Town, Pargana Lakhne - shwar, District Ballia. The suit was decreed by the learned Munsif vide its judgment dated 11-12-1954. Baldeo died leaving behind his two sons Gauri Shanker and Vishwa Nath as his heirs. Gauri Shanker and Vishwa Nath sold the said Khandahar in favour of Durbal Ram by sale deed dated 30-4-1958. Against the judgment and decree dated 11-12-1954 an appeal was filed by Puranwasi Ram which was dismissed by the District Judge, Ballia on 25-8-1958. Second Appeal against the judgment and decree dated 25-8-1958 passed by the District Judge, Ballia was filed in this Court being Second Appeal No. 3131 of 1958 (Puran - wasi Ram v. Gauri Shanker and Vishwa Nath) which was dismissed by this Court vide its judgment and decree dated 17-1-1966. Durbal Ram did not file any application in the First or Second Appeal to be substituted in place of Gauri Shanker and Vishwa Nath on the basis of the sale deed dated 30-4-1958. An Execution Application was filed by Gauri Shanker and Vishwa Nath for executing the decree passed in Original suit No. 481 of 1953 which was dismissed in default on 3-8-166. On 4-4-1967 Gauri Shanker and Vishwa Nath filed second Execution Application which was registered as Execution Case No. 58 of 1967. A suit was filed by the Zamindar against Gauri Shanker and Vishwa Nath which was dismissed. The Execution case No. 58 of 1967 which was stayed for some time was ultimately consigned. Durbal Ram on 27-5-1978 filed an application under Order XXI R.16 C. P.C. in Execution case No. 58 of 1967 praying that Durbal Ram be substituted in place of Gauri Shanker and Vishwa Nath as Decree holder and execution proceedings be proceeded through Durbal Ram. The said application was objected and was dismissed by the learned Munsif on 23-1-1982. Again an application was filed by Durbal Ram on 25-1-1982 for amendment of his application under Order XXI R.16 Code of Civil Procedure by addition of word "S.144 and S.146 of Code of Civil Procedure". This amendment application was dismissed on 26-2-1982. A Civil Revision No. 52 of 1982 was filed against the order which was also dismissed on 22-11-1982. Learned Munsif ultimately considered the application filed by Durbal Ram under Order XXI R.16 Code of Civil Procedure and allowed the application of Durbal Ram on 24th December, 1985 and amended the execution application as prayed. The date was fixed for further proceedings in the execution application. An appeal was filed by the petition against the order of the learned Munsif dated 24-12-1985. The said appeal was dismissed by the Additional District Judge by the order dated 18-12-1990. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the aforesaid orders dated 24-12-1985 passed by the Munsif and the order dated 18-12-1990 passed by the II Additional District Judge.

4. Sri V. K. S. Chaudhary, learned Senior Advocate, challenging the impugned orders raised following submissions in support of the wri




























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top