LAWS(GAU)-2008-11-68

PANNALAL GHOSH Vs. STATE

Decided On November 26, 2008
PANNALAL GHOSH Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (Oral)- This revision application under Sec. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure (briefly 'Code of Civil Procedure') has been filed by the Plaintiffs/decree holders assailing the legality and the correctness of the order dated 8-12-1999 passed by the Civil Judge, Sr. Division, North Tripura, Kailashahar in Execution (T)09 of 1999, whereby the executing court has frustrated the attempt of the Petitioners to get the decree passed in the year 1960 executed under the garb of amendment of the said decree by the trial court in the year 1990. By the impugned order, the learned Civil Judge has dismissed the execution petition on two counts. Firstly, it has been held that the decree dated 21.11.1960 is now un-executable as the same is barred by limitation Secondly, the decree dated 21.11.1960 passed on the basis of original judgment dated 10.11.1960 was fully satisfied on 28.4.1964.

(2.) Heard Sri S.P. Dutta Purakayastha, learned Counsel for the Petitioners who are the legal heirs of the original decree holder, namely, late Akhil Chandra Ghosh. The Respondent Nos. 1 to 6 are the legal heirs of the original tenant of the Plaintiff, namely, late Basanta Kumar Das. They are represented by Sri P. Chakraborty, learned Counsel. The Respondent No. 7 is the subsequent purchaser of the tenanted premises. Sri S. Deb, learned senior Counsel represented Her.

(3.) For effective disposal of this revision application, it is necessary to advert to the relevant facts which are as follows: The predecessor-in-interest of the Petitioner, namely, late Akhil Chandra Ghosh filed a suit against late Basanta Kumar Das for recovery of arrear rent seeking additional relief of his ejectment in the event the tenant fail to pay the arrear rent within a time, which may be fixed by the court. The suit was registered as Rent Suit No. 03 of 1960 in the court of Munsiff, Kailashahar. The suit was decided ex parte on 10.11.1960. Since the reliefs sought for by the Plaintiffs and the judgment passed by the trial court have a direct bearing in this revision application, those are being quoted in extensor: