http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1 CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 1100 of 2000 PETITIONER:
Ram Bachan Rai & Ors.
RESPONDENT:
Ram Udar Rai & Ors.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 18/01/2006 BENCH:
ARIJIT PASAYAT & TARUN CHATTERJEE JUDGMENT:
J U D G M E N T ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.
The High Court of Patna dismissed the Civil Revision filed by the appellant summarily. Challenge in the Civil Revision was to the order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, VII, Patna, in execution proceedings. By the said order Subordinate Judge held that the plea raised by the appellant about the execution petition being barred by time in terms of Article 136 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (in short the ’Limitation Act’) was untenable.
Learned Subordinate Judge held that the period of limitation starts running not from the date of decree, but when the decree becomes enforceable i.e. when it is signed.
In support of the appeal strong reliance was placed on several decisions of this Court i.e. W.B. Essential Commodities Supply Corpn. v. Swadesh Agro Farming & Storage Pvt. Ltd.
and Anr. (1999 (8) SCC 315), Hameed Joharan (Dead) and Ors. v. Abdul Salam (Dead) by Lrs. And Ors. (2001 (7) SCC 573).
In Hameed Joharan’s case (supra) it was held after referring to the meaning to the word ’enforce’ from various dictionaries words ’when the decree or order becomes enforceable’ should be read in literal sense and as per intention of the legislators 12 years period is to be reckoned from the date the decree became enforceable i.e. the date of the decree or order.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the correct position of law is expressed in Shankar Balant Lokhande (Dead) by LRs. v. Chandrakant S. Lokhande & Anr. (1995 (3) SCC 413) and in other two cases the correct principles in law were not kept in view. We find that there is some area of conflict amongst several two-judge Bench decisions. It is also to be noticed that noticing the conflict between these judgments, reference has been made to a three-Judge Bench in Chiranji Lal (dead) by Lrs. Hari Das (dead) by Lrs. (2005 (2) SCC 261).
This case may also be placed before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders to be placed alongwith Chiranji Lal’s case (supra).