CHAKRAPANI JAGANNATH PRASAD Vs. CHANDOO SAHADEO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal from an order of District Judge of Dhar refecting an application preferred by the appellants under Order 21, Rule 2, Civil P. C. for recording and certifying an adjustment of a decree under execution, said to have been arrived at between the parties.

(2.) THE material facts are that a decree was passed by the Court of the District Judge of Ujjain on 24th February 1956. Thereafter the decree -holders moved the court of the District Judge of Ujjain for the issue of a precept under Section 46, Civil P. C. for attachment of certain property belonging to the judgment -debtors situated within the limits of the court of the District Judge of Dhar. In pursuance of that precept, the judgment -debtors' property was attached in March 1957. On 29th March 1957 the judgment -debtors presented in the court of the District Judge of Dhar an application for recording an adjustment under Order 21, Rule 2, Civil P. C.

(3.) I am unable to accede to these contentions. An application under Order 21, Rule 2, Civil P. C. has to be made to the court executing the decree. On 29th March 1957 when the appellants first applied under Order 21, Rule 2, Civil P. C., for recording the adjustment, the decree had not been transferred to the Court of the District Judge of Dhar where the judgment -debtors presented that application. No doubt the court of District Judge. Ujjain which passed the decree issued a precept under Section 46, Civil P. C. to the Dhar Court. But the issue of a precept under Section 46, Civil P. C., has not the effect of transfer of a decree for execution to the court to which the precept is issued.