PREMIER ROAD CARRIERS Vs. CHHATTISGARH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the instant civil revision the applicant has assailed the order dated 11.12.2003 passed by Additional District Judge, Korba in Execution Case No.24-B/91 whereby the Court below has rejected the application filed by the applicant objecting the execution proceedings initiated by the respondent on the ground that the respondent was not in fact the decree holder and therefore the said decree which is sought to be executed by the respondent is an un-executable decree.

(2.) Brief facts leading to the filing of the revision is that under the erstwhile state of Madhya Pradesh, the Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board (for short 'MPEB') has filed the Civil Suit against the applicant for the transaction between the parties in respect of consignment of a machine booked by M/s Pennwalt India Ltd., Mumbai for delivery at Korba (now in C.G.). The respondent/Board's contention in the trial Court was that there was default on the part of the applicant/transporter in not delivering the goods at Korba, the consignment was to upload at Korba not Nagpur and when request was made on behalf of the respondent/Board to deliver the consignment at Korba, the applicant company sought for extra freight and demurage charges amounting Rs. 15,000. The respondent/Board thereafter filed a suit against the applicant for recovery towards the price of the consignment. After considering the parties of either side, the trial Court passed a decree on 22.02.2001 in favour of the Board for Rs.1,79,952 towards price and Rs.16,360 towards interest with further interest @ 6% per annum till the date of realization.

(3.) By the time the trial Court could pass the judgment and decree, the State of Chhattisgarh had come into existence and the Electricity Board for the State of Chhattisgarh was thereafter known as Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board (For short 'CSEB'). Subsequently, the CSEB filed the execution application for recovery of total sum of Rs.5,45,421 including interest upto 31.12.2001. The said execution application was signed and verified by Superintending Engineer (Stores), CSEB, Korba (East) who was the officer-in-charge of the concerned division where the tender was pertaining to. On receipt of the notice of the Execution Court, the applicant/judgment debtor filed an application under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure raising an objection that the decree cannot be executed by CSEB as CSEB was not a party before the Court below and the same cannot be executed by the respondent. On the same day respondent/Board moved an application under Order 21 Rule 101 and 104 read with Section 151 and 153 of the Code of Civil Procedure requesting for reading the words MPEB as CSEB in the judgment and decree. After considering the submissions and objections raised by the either party, the Court below finally passed the impugned order dated 11.12.2003 rejecting the objection raised by the applicant/ judgment-debtor in respect of the nonexecutability of the judgment and decree dated 22.02.2001. It is this order which has been assailed by the applicant in the instant Civil Revision.