HUSSAINKHAN HAIDER KHAN Vs. PANDURANG GOVIND BHATTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A somewhat interested point is involved in this revision application in regard to the limitation prescribed under Article 136 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

(2.) The petitioner is a judgment debtor whereas the respondent is a decree holder. In Special Civil Suit No. 46/1968, the respondent obtained a decree for partition, separate possession and mesne profits. The decree was passed on 27-2-1970. On application filed by the respondent on 16-3-1971, claiming Rs. 9,000/- as mesne profits, an ex parte order was passed on 2-11-1971 directing the judgment debtor to pay to the decree holder as sum of Rs. 9,000/- as mesne profits. It was also directed that the decree holder should pay the requisite court fee stamp on Rs. 9,000/-. The decree holder, however, did not pay the court fee stamps nor has he taken any steps for execution of the said decree from 29-11-1971 to 22-7-1990. On 27-3-1991 he filed application being Darkhast No. 8/91 for execution of decree of mesne profits for Rs. 10,671/-.

(3.) In answer to the show cause notice issued to the judgment debtor, he objected to the execution. The main objection of the judgment debtor was that the execution application is barred by limitation on account of its having been made long after expiry of the period of 12 years as prescribed under Article 136 of the Limitation Act, 1963.