SMT. SOMALI DUTTA Vs. MAKHAN SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In Title Suit No. 10 of 1978 of the Court of Assistant District Judge, Jorhat, a decree for specific performance of contract was passed on 28.1.80, the relevant portion whereof was as under:

(2.) Aggrieved, the judgment debtor has come to this court, and Shri A.C. Sarma, Learned Counsel appearing on his behalf has contended that under the decree, the decree holder was required to deposit the balance amount of Rs. 24,000.00 within 31.3.80, but the decree holder had not deposited the said amount within the time specified in the decree, but the execution court has erroneously by going behind the decree proceeded with the execution. In support, Shri A.C. Sarma has cited Topanmal Chhotamal Vs. M/s Kundomal Gangaram, AIR 1960 SC 388. where in paras 4 and 5, the court reiterated the principle that "the court executing the decree cannot go behind the decree; it must take the decree as it stands, for the decree is binding and conclusive between the parties in the suit."

(3.) No one appeared for the opposite parties.