GANGUBAI RAGHUNATH SATPUTE Vs. VITHAL BALARAM AHIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal has been referred for disposal to a Division Bench in view of the importance of the point involved. The appellants here are the legal representatives of original judgment -debtor against whom a money decree in the sum of Rs. 3,370 was passed in Civil Suit No. 97 -B of 1955 on 19 -8 -1955. The decree -holder/respondent filed an execution petition for realisation of the decretal amount on 29 -6 -1956, but the same was dropped on 18 -10 -1956. The decree -holder kept silence and took no steps to execute the decree till 20 -12 -1966 when the fresh execution bearing No. 40 of 1967 was filed. Vide order dated 12 -1 -1967, the Executing Court dismissed the Darkhast as having been barred by time. Appeal under section 47, Civil Procedure Code was preferred before the Assistant Judge, Nagpur, who relying on the decision of the learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of The Presidency Industrial Bank Ltd. v. The Hindustan Leather Industries Ltd. : AIR 1969 Bom. 84 came to the conclusion that the Darkhast was not barred by time as it was within 12 years of the passing of the decree in terms of Article 136 of the new Limitation Act, 1963. Consequently, the first appeal was allowed. The present second appeal is directed against the said decision given by the learned Assistant Judge.

(2.) SHRI Choudhari, the learned counsel for the appellants, brought to our notice the following relevant portion from the judgment given in Industrial Bank's case (supra), on the basis of which the first appeal was allowed: - -

(3.) WERE we to go by these changes alone, there was no difficulty in agreeing with the decision recorded by the learned Single Judge. But provisions in Part V of the new Act in general and section 31 in particular must change the course of the view. Section 31 reads thus: -