DOGAR MAL Vs. HARDIAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This execution first appeal is directed against the order of the Subordinate Judge Second Class, Nawanshahr, dated 26th February, 1975, whereby he dismissed the objection-petition of the judgment-debtor to the effect that the decree dated 23rd December, 1972 being a conditional decree and the condition envisaged therein having not been complied with by the decree-holder, there was, therefore, no decree in the eye of law that could be executed.

(2.) According to the objector-judgment-debtor, the suit for specific performance was decreed by the trial Court as a result of a compromise arrived at between the judgment-debtor and decree-holders, would withdraw criminal complaint under Section 420 Indian Penal Code pending against the judgment-debtor and that since Hardial Singh failed to withdraw his complaint, the decree-holders were not entitled to seek the execution of the decree obtained by them as a result of the said compromise.

(3.) The executing Court held that it was no doubt that one of the terms of the compromise between the parties was that Hardial Singh, one of the plaintiff-decree-holders, was to withdraw his complaint against the judgment-debtor which at that time was pending in a Court of law. It, however, held that since the said term was not reflected in the decree dated 23rd December, 1972, as it did not find a mention therein, so it could not be said that the decree was a conditional one. That the Court, which passed the decree, having become functus officio, it, as an executing Court, had no power either to go behind the decree or add or subtract any term from the same.