STATE BANK OF INDIA BHOPAL Vs. PLASTICHEM BHOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the impugned order, the trial Court has permitted the decretal debt to be discharged in instalments of Rs. 80,000. 00 per year. The direction is that upon non-payment of two consecutive instalments, the decretal amount shall become executable at once.

(2.) THE decree was passed as far back as in February, 1984 and the application for grant of instalments for payment of the decretal amount in terms of Order 20, Rule 11, Code of Civil Procedure was made on 14-9-1987. By a separate order (separate matter in Civil Revision No. 243 of 1989) the delay in filing that application was condoned. The application was opposed by the applicant. They stated that the non-applicant and its partner are possessed of sufficient means assets as also income to discharge the decretal sum in lump sum. No such prayer was made in the written statement. The non-applicant adduced some evidence and the Court allowed that application. The revision is directed against that order permitting payment by instalments.

(3.) AT the outset and before entering into merit, it may be stated that by a separate order passed today in Civil Revision No. 243 of 1989, I have set aside the order of the executing Court whereby the delay in making the application for grant of instalments was condoned. I have dismissed that application filed under section 5 of the Limitation Act, That being so, on that count alone, this revision must be allowed and the application for permission to pay the decretal amount by instalments has to be dismissed. How ever, I proceed to examine this revision also on its merits.