AMEER HAMZA Vs. M GEORGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in these three revisions by the same set of judgment debtors is with regard to the finding entered by the execution court (Principal Sub Court, Ernakulam) finding that the E. Ps. for execution of the decrees passed in O. S. Nos. 111/78, 112/78 and 113/78 of that court are not barred by limitation. The decrees in these three cases were passed on 9.1.79, 10.1.79 and 10.1.79 respectively and E.P. Nos. 1103, 1104 and 1102/92 respectively were filed on 17.9.92, 19.9.92 and 24.8.92 respectively. In other words, all the three E. Ps. were filed beyond 12 years from the respective dates of the decree.

(2.) The execution court which went into the aspect of limitation raised by the judgment debtors noted that the earlier E. Ps. filed in these cases as E.P. Nos. 449, 397 and 395/80 were all dismissed on 30.3.81 directing the judgment debtors to continue payment of decree amount in instalments. On that basis the court further held that the contention of the present revision petitioners that the E. Ps. were barred by limitation was not tenable.

(3.) The learned counsel for the revision petitioners submitted, during hearing, that under Art.136 of the Limitation Act, time runs from the date of decree and not from the date on which the prior E. Ps., if any, were disposed of and that viewed from that perspective the impugned orders are defective.