VENKATRAMANA Vs. GAJANAN TRADING COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is directed against the order dated 25-2-1999 passed in ex. No. 9 of 1997 on the file of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Yel-lapur, dismissing the execution petition filed under Order 21, Rule 11 of the CPC.

(2.) THE petitioners are the L. Rs of the decree-holder. The respondents are the judgment-debtors. Petitioner l (a)-Power of attorney holder of petitioners Kb) to l (k) filed this execution petition under Order 21 of the cpc against the judgment-debtor 2 for recovery of arrears of decretal amount of Rs. 17,782/- passed in O. S. No. 9 of 1984. After registering this case, notice was issued to judgment-debtor 2 who appeared through his Counsel and filed objections contending that the execution petition filed is against law and facts, as such it is liable to be dismissed as not maintainable. It is also stated that this execution petition is filed only to harass the judgment-debtors. The decree-holders filed Execution Peti-tion No. 6 of 1996. No recovery of the amount was possible in that! petition and it was felt that at that moment, chance of recovery was less. Hence memo was given to close the petition for the present keeping the action for execution and right of execution preserved. So the total satis-faction was not recorded in that execution petition and it was closed for the present. Now again the decree-holders filed the present EP No, 9 off 1997 for recovery of the remaining balance of the decree amount due in the decree.

(3.) IT has been argued by the decree-holders that the EP No. 6 of 1 was closed for the present and subsequent EP No. 9 of 1996 is only application to revive Execution Petition No. 6 of 1996 and not a separi proceeding. On the other hand the judgment-debtors have taken up contention that the subsequent Execution Petition No. 9 of 1997 beyond the period of limitation as such, the execution petition itself not maintainable and cannot be considered as the one to revive Execution Petition No, 6 of 1996. The learned Civil Judge (Junior Division has dismissed the execution petition filed by the debtors. It is held the Execution Petition is filed beyond 12 years, as such it is not tainable as it is hit by Article 136 of the Limitation Act.