DESABANDHU BEHERA Vs. HARIMOHAN BEHERA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two questions of seminal importance are involved in this revision application. Since both of them revolve round interpretation of scope and ambit of Order 20, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short 'the Code'), reference to the factual controversy is unnecessary.

(2.) THE two questions which need adjudication are as follows ; (i) Whether the Orissa High Court Amendment in respect of Sub -rule (2) of Rule 11 of Order 20 as brought in with effect from 7 -5 -1954 is inconsistent with the provisions contained in the Code and therefore, stood repealed in terms of Section 97(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act (104 of 1976) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Amending Act') ; and (ii) Whether any Court other than the one that passed the decree has jurisdiction to order for postponement of the amount decreed, or payment thereof by instalments. In the instant case, an application for grant of instalment filed before the Executing Court was rejected on the ground that the Executing. Court had no jurisdiction.