CHOKHA NAND MADAN Vs. ASIAN EXHIBITIORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (Oral)-This Civil Revision is directed against order dated 9th December, 1988 of Sub-Judge) 1st class whereby application of decree-holder-petitioner filed under Order 21 Rule 41 Civil Procedure Code for directions to judgment-debtor to appear and disclose his assets has been dismissed. I have heard counsel for the parties and after giving my considered thought to the matter before me, I have come to the conclusion that this Civil Revision must succeed.

(2.) Facts giving rise to this petition are that petitioner- decree-holder had filed an application under Order 23 Rule 41 of Civil Procedure Code for directions to judgment debtor-respondent to disclose his assets and the said application was virtually dismissed summarily by the executing court with the observations that 'it is the duty of the decree-holder to find out the assets of judgment- debtor to get the decretal amount recovered. The responsibility cannot be shifted upon the judgment debtor'. It appears that the learned trial court has not even cared to go through the provisions of Order 21 Rule 41 of the Civil Procedure Code ., which lays down as under:-

(3.) Perusal of sub-rule (1) of Rule 41 of the Civil Procedure Code shows itself that it was open to a decree-holder to seek the assistance of the court and court is obliged under this rule to grant request of the decree-holder in order to find out the assets of the judgment debtor.