OOMMEN NAINAN Vs. SOMASUNDARAM PILLAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE decree-holder who got a decree dated 30-11-1970 for recovery of money, filed an execution petition, E. P. 124 of 1981, on 7-8-1981. THE suit was for realisation of some amount from the respondent-judgment debtor. A decree was drafted saying that the judgment debtor can pay off the amount in instalments and, in default, the decree-holder can apply for the passing of a final decree. This clause in the decree was not in conformity with the judgment. No doubt, in the judgment the plaintiff-decree holder was entitled to realise the amount. But, unfortunately, a proper decree had not been drafted in terms of the judgment.

(2.) WHEN the decree-holder put the decree in execution, it was found out that the decree as it stood on 7-8-1981 was not enforceable by an execution court since that decree provided for the passing of a final decree. Realising this serious error, it seems that the decree-holder did not press the E. P. and it was dismissed.

(3.) IT is significant to note that when the new Limitation act came into force, the provision for execution of decree was provided in a comprehensive manner in Art. 136 in the place of Art. 182 of the earlier Limitation act. Art. 136 of the Limitation Act reads thus: IT is significant to note that in Art. 182 of the old limitation Act, the starting point of limitation was described on several basis and one of the basis was "where the decree has been amended the date of amendment; or". Now, the starting point of limitation is described as "when the decree or order becomes enforceable". Naturally, a question has arisen, when exactly a decree becomes enforceable? A decree becomes enforceable only when there is no impediment for the decree-holder to enforce the decree.