YARLAGADDA BAPANNA Vs. DEVATA CHINA YERAKAYYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The point involved in this appeal is whether the bond executed by the judgment-debtor us surety can he proceeded with in execution proceedings or a separate suit will have to be filed to enforce the liability. The lower Court has relied on the observations in the Bench decision of this Court in Babulal v. Hyderabad Municipal Corporation 1960-2 Andh WR 310 at p. 514 : A.I.R. 1961 Andhra Pradesh 413 at p. 416 wherein it has been held

(2.) Although the security bond as such cannot be enforced under Section 145 C.P.C., which seems to apply to personal liability, Section 151 Civil Procedure Code comes to the rescue of the decreeholder who could request the court to enforce the bond in the exercise of its inherent jurisdiction, when the bond is executed in favour of the Court. There is abundant authority for this position. See Subbarao v. Venkataraju, 1964-1 Andh WR 374 : A.I.R. 1964 Andhra Pradesh 339. This position is not contested by the respondent.

(3.) This being the correct legal position, the decree-holder could have the bond enforced by virtue of Section 151 C.P.C. To that extent the order of the lower appellate Court is varied.