MATHURA PRASAD JAMUNA PRASAD Vs. GHASIRAM ALIAS RAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a money decree was passed in favour of one Pooran Chand. He has since died. Execution is now sought by his legal heirs.

(2.) THE argument raised is that the money decree would also fall within the definition of 'debt' and accordingly Section 214 (1) (b) of the Succession Act, 1925 would be attracted. Reliance is being placed on 1981 (2) MPWN 57, Kewalram v. Surjeet Singh. This Court preferred to follow the view expressed by Nagpur High Court in Tejraj Rajmal v. Rampyari, 1938 NLJ 99 = AIR 1938 Nag. 528. This Court observed as under :

(3.) ACCORDINGLY this petition is allowed. The observation made by Courts below that succession certificate is not required is set aside. It is however made clear that the petitioner would deposit decretal amount with the Execution Court. The Executing Court would get this amount deposited in a fixed deposit account in Punjab and Sind Bank, Jaynendra Branch, Gwalior.