MATHUNNI VARKEY Vs. RAGHAVAN PILLAI PARAMESWARAN PILLAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal by the decree holder, the question for decision is whether the execution petition dated the 28th July, 1956, is barred by limitation or not. The suit was on a hypothecation bond, and the decree was passed on the 27th June, 1952. The fee for registering the decree was paid at the time of the institution of the suit in accordance with the law in force in Travancore at the time, but at the time the decree was passed, that law had been superseded by the provisions of the Indian Registration Act under which the decree had to be sent for registration. This provision was not complied with, and so the decree was not registered in accordance with law. In a similar case decided by this court in Lakshmi v. Mayitti Narayanan ( 1962 KLT 27 ) it was held that the period of limitation for execution of registered decrees would not apply. Following this, I hold that the decree holders execution petition was rightly dismissed as barred by limitation.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant produced two letters as having been received by the appellant from the respondent and relied on them as constituting acknowledgments under S.19 of the Limitation Act. The plea of acknowledgment was not raised in the execution court, or in this Court, at the time the appeal was preferred, nor do I think that this is a proper case for admitting the fresh documents. For these reasons, the appeal cannot succeed. It is dismissed but without costs.