Skip to content


L. Narayan Dass Vs. Mt. Taravali - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectLimitation
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Reported inAIR1933All756; 145Ind.Cas.915
AppellantL. Narayan Dass
RespondentMt. Taravali
Cases ReferredPuthia Veetil Mohidin v. Raman Nayar
Excerpt:
- .....in this high court, but it has been considered by the madras high court in the case of puthia veetil mohidin v. raman nayar air 1920 mad 224. the bench in that case decided that an application for a copy of decree cannot be taken to be a step-in-aid of execution. the appeal is therefore dismissed.
Judgment:

Young, J.

1. This is an execution second appeal from the decision of the learned District Judge of Moradabad. The only point that arises in this case is the question of limitation. It appears that the decree-holder obtained a decree and made an application in execution on 11th August 1927. That application was dismissed for default. The application that I have to consider in the present appeal was made on 31st January 1931. It is clear that this application was out of time. The appellant however contends that because he applied on 10th February 1928 to the High Court for a copy of the decree in order that he might lodge it in the executing Court time begins to run from that date. He argues that this application to the High Court was a step-in-aid of execution within the meaning of Article 182, Limitation Act. It is to be noted that the application to the High Court for a copy was not proceeded With and in fact no copy was obtained.

2. It appears to me that mere application for a copy of a decree cannot be said to be a step-in-aid of execution of a decree. A copy of a decree-might be applied for a variety of purposes, not necessarily for the purpose of executing a decree. I think, to come within Article 182 a decree-holder must make some application to the execution Court itself. It appears that this point has never been decided in this High Court, but it has been considered by the Madras High Court in the case of Puthia Veetil Mohidin v. Raman Nayar AIR 1920 Mad 224. The Bench in that case decided that an application for a copy of decree cannot be taken to be a step-in-aid of execution. The appeal is therefore dismissed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //