Skip to content


Golden Knitting Co. Vs. Mural Traders (India) - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Case NumberA.A.O. No. 96 of 1948
Judge
Reported inAIR1950Mad293
ActsCode of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 44A
AppellantGolden Knitting Co.
RespondentMural Traders (India)
Appellant AdvocateS. Sitarama Iyer and ;S. Rajaraman, Advs.
Respondent AdvocateC.R. Pattabhiraman and ;R. Ramasubba Iyer, Advs.
DispositionAppeal allowed
Cases ReferredDominion of India v. Hiralal
Excerpt:
- - , there ruled that in circumstances like those of the present case there could be no execution had at the hands of the court in the dominion of india. i consider that ruling to be perfectly correct and i accordingly apply it to the present case......learned district judge is obviously wrong. after the appointed day the judgment of the court at karachi passed before then became a foreign judgment in respect of which execution could only be had if the territory in which the decree in question was passed has become, by an arrangement between the two dominions, a reciprocating territory within the meaning of section 44a, civil p. c. the precise point now arising for decision has, been decided by a bench of the high court of calcutta composed of mookerjee and chunder jj , in a case reported in dominion of india v. hiralal : air1950cal12 . it has been, after a careful consideration of the relevant provisions of the indian independence act and civil p. c., there ruled that in circumstances like those of the present case there could be.....
Judgment:

Raghava Rao, J.

1. The question in this case is whether the District Court of Coimbatore in the Dominion of India has power to execute, after 15th August 1947, a decree passed by the Court of Small Causes at Karachi in the Dominion of Pakistan prior to that date and transmitted for execution after that day by that Court to the District Court of Coimbatore. The learned District Judge in the Court below held that he had the power. The learned District Judge is obviously wrong. After the appointed day the judgment of the Court at Karachi passed before then became a foreign judgment in respect of which execution could only be had if the territory in which the decree in question was passed has become, by an arrangement between the two Dominions, a reciprocating territory within the meaning of Section 44A, Civil P. C. The precise point now arising for decision has, been decided by a Bench of the High Court of Calcutta composed of Mookerjee and Chunder JJ , in a case reported in Dominion of India v. Hiralal : AIR1950Cal12 . It has been, after a careful consideration of the relevant provisions of the Indian Independence Act and Civil P. C., there ruled that in circumstances like those of the present case there could be no execution had at the hands of the Court in the Dominion of India. I consider that ruling to be perfectly correct and I accordingly apply it to the present case. The civil miscellaneous appeal is accordingly allowed with costs throughout.


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