MANINDRA NATH MONDAL Vs. MUGNERAM BANGUR AND COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal by the judgment-debtor the only point that arises for consideration is whether the execution of the decree in question is barred by limitation either as to its entirety or at least as to a part of it. Both the Courts below have answered the question in the negative and hence this appeal by the unsuccessful objecting judgment-debtor.

(2.) The relevant facts lie within a short compass and they may be briefly stated as follows: On April 4, 1944, the decree-holder Messrs. Mugneram Bangore and Co. obtained an instalment money decree for Rs. 1,769-8 as plus costs in Money Suit No. 40 of 1942, of the second Court of the Munsif at Alipore. The costs were directed to be paid within one month from the date of the decree and the rest of the decretal amount was made payable in four instalments beginning from Pous, 1351 B.S., to Pous, 1354 B.S. In the decree there was a default clause that in case of default in the payment of any one of the kists the whole amount of the decree then outstanding would become immediately payable.

(3.) There was default in the payment of the first two instalments as also in the payment of the costs and, accordingly, in the early part of 1946,-on January 24, 1946, to be precise, the decree-holder took out execution in Money Execution Case No. 16 of 1946 for the entire decretal dues in terms of the default clause mentioned above. The judgment-debtor objected that, in view of Section 34(2) of the Bengal Money Lenders Act, the execution for the entire decretal dues in default of payment of some of the kists was not allowable and under that provision of the law it was permissible only for the defaulting kist or kists.