RAM SARUP Vs. SHER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether S. 48 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (now repealed with effect from the 1st of Jan. 1964, by S. 28 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963) was controlled by Art. 182 of the First Sch. of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908, is the significant question which falls for determination by this Full Bench.

(2.) This reference to the larger Bench has been necessitated by a forceful challenge to the correctness of the judgment reported as Amar Nath v. Mul Raj, AIR 1975 Punj & Har 246 (FB), wherein it has been held that S. 48 aforesaid laid down a bar which was final and which could not be extended by the amendment of the decree, whether that amendment was made before or after the expiry of the said period of twelve years, and that the date of the decree within the meaning of S. 48 of the Code is always the date of the original decree and not the date of the amended decree.

(3.) The case in hand is a glaring ex-ample of the occasional tardiness of judicial procedure. In the suit originally filed by the decree-holder for Partition of the joint property, the preliminary decree was passed by the trial Court more than four decades earlier on the 27th of March, 1938. For the purposes of this reference, it is unnecessary to follow in detail the chequered history of the case thereafter. It suffices to mention that in the tortuous course of proceedings that ensued, the decree aforesaid was allowed to be amended on the material date of the 16th of July, 1966. The crucial question that now arises is whether the terminus for the execution of the decree is the date of its amendment (16th of July, 1966) as provided for in clause (4) in col. 3 of Art. 182 of the First Schedule of the Limitation Act 1908 or the date of the original decree, namely, the 27th of March, 1938.