YUSUF SAIT Vs. ANANTHARAMA KRISHNA IYER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Revision petitioner is the defendant against whom respondent plaintiff obtained decree in O. S.134 of 1951 of the Sub Court, Trivandrum. Plea of limitation raised by the defendant was rejected by the executing court.

(2.) Admitted facts would show that the decree was passed on 28-11-1951. Plaintiff filed E.P. 336 of 1961 and it was dismissed on 1-2-1963. While the E. P. was pending, Wakf Board filed claim petition. That was dismissed on 20-11-1962. Wakf Board filed A. S.67 of 1963 against the dismissal order. While A. S.67 of 1963 was pending there was stay of execution proceedings. From 15-7-64 onwards, on which date appeal was dismissed, there was no stay. The present E.P. was filed on 28-10-79. Contention of the defendant is that the E. P. is hopelessly time barred.

(3.) The contention of the plaintiff is that, the order dismissing the previous execution petition was not a judicial order but only an administrative one, that the previous execution petition has to be deemed to be pending and hence the present execution petition can be continued by reviving it and therefore, the present execution petition is not barred by limitation. That is precisely the question to be decided in this revision petition.