SHANTABAI MORESHWARRAO HINGNEKAR Vs. MARIAMBI ABDUL WAKIL KAZI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order passed by Executing Court (Civil Judge, Junior Division Katol) on 17-1-1985 dismissing the execution application on the ground that the decree sought to be executed is a nullity, has been challenged in this revision.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this litigation may be briefly stated as follows : one Shantabai Moreshwar Hingnekar-the petitioner in this revision, obtained a decree against the respondent Mariambi in Regular civil Suit No. 211/81. This decree was for Rs. 5,800-The suit was instituted before the Civil Judge, Junior Division at nagpur and the decree was ultimately passed directing the defendant-judgment-debtor to pay Rs. 5,800 with costs and interest. The decree was ex pane. The Nagpur Civil Court transferred this decree for execution to the Court of Civil judge, Junior Division, Katol. A Darkhast was filed before that Court. The judgment-debtor put in her appearance before the Executing Court and filed her objections to the decree. The objections were two-fold :

(3.) MR. Shukla, the learned adovcate for the petitioner strenuously urged before me that the Executing Court fell into error in branding this decree as without jurisdiction. There is no dispute at this stage that the claim made in Regular Civil Suit No. 211/81 was on the basis of unpaid consideration of the sale deed. The suit was filed at Nagpur and it went ex parte and ultimately an ex parte decree came to be passed. The question which arises for decision in this revision is, whether there was an inherent lack of jurisdiction in the Court. In short, the question is, whether the lack of territorial jurisdiction agitated before the Court is tantamount to lack of inherent jurisdiction.