NARAIN KUMAR Vs. NEKI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On Jan. 25, 1973, Neki Ram, respondent filed a suit against Narain Kumar petitioner and his father Lachhman Dass for rendition of accounts, possession of stall No. B-8/118 situate at Main Road, Samana, District Patiala, as also for the recovery of Rupees 200/- as damages for breaking the lock and two glass panes of the almirahs and Rs. 800/- as mesne profits from Oct. 2, 1970 to June 1,1971, at the rate of Rs. 100/- per month. The suit was valued for purposes of Court-fee and jurisdiction at Rs. 200/- for rendition of accounts, Rs. 1500/- for possession, Rs. 200/. for damages and at Rs. 800/- for mesne profits. The suit was pending in the Court of Shri P. S. Bajaj, Additional Sub Judge IIIrd Class, Patiala, on Dec. 7, 1973, on which date the parties compromised. The trial Court granted a decree for Rs. 5,100/- and for possession of the stall (shop) in favour of Neki Ram, respondent and against Narain Kumar petitioner and his father Lachhman Dass. The decretal amount could be paid in two equal instalments of Rs. 2550/- each on April 15, 1974 and Dec. 15. 1974. In case of payment of both the instalments on the due dates the entire decree, including the one for possession of stall was to stand fully satisfied and in the event of default of payment of any instalment in time the decree-holder could recover the decretal amount due as also the possession of the stall in dispute. The judgment-debtors paid the first instalment of Rs. 2550/- in time. The amount of second instalment was remitted to the decree-holder by money order on Dec. 23, 1974. The amount of second instalment having not been paid by the due date, that is Dec. 15, 1974, the decree-holder sought the execution of the decree. The petitioner filed an objection petition under S. 47 of the Civil P. C. which was resisted by Neki Ram decree-holder.

(2.) The executing Court framed the following issues:

(3.) Whether the validity of decree in question cannot be challenged by the Objector?