ASHOK CHANDER Vs. C P BANSAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ashok Chandra, Smt. Savitri Devi and Jagdish Chandra filed a suit in this Court for dissolution of partnership and rendition of accounts. The defendants were Sarvshri O. P. Bansal, Suresh Bansal and Smt. Hira Sundri. On June 20, 1973 a compromise was arrived at between the parties. The decree was passed in terms of the compromise and the deed itself was made a part of the decree. The compromise deed provided inter alia the following conditions :-" 1 (b) Shri O. P. Bansal and Shri Suresh Bansal further gave an undertaking to the Hon'ble High Court, not to sale, mortgage or encumber in any manner their property mentioned below until the defendants have paid in full the said sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh and fifty thousand) only as mentioned above. The plaintiffs shall have the first charge at their option on the undermentioned property." One single storeyed Building in Bansal Estate, bearing Municipal No. III/76 with two bighas of vacant land going towards Jawahar Park, Mall Road, Solan (Himachal Pradesh) let out to M/s. Himachal Scientific and Optical Works at Rs. 7,500/-per annum and bounded as below :- NORTH : Double storeyed building be-longing to O. P. Bansal and in possession of Shri O. P. Bansal. SOUTH : Double storeyed building be-longing to Sbri O. P. Bansal and in possession of Shri L. P, Jain as tenant. EAST: Other property consisting of a Shed belonging to Shri O. P. Bansal. WEST : Open ground of Bansal Estate belonging to Shri O. P. Bansal. (d) That the defendants shall be liable to pay two-third amount of sales- tax and the plaintiffs 1 and 2 shall pay one-third sales tax payable by the partnership firm upto 15th June, 1973. All sales-tax liability for the future business after 15th of June, 1973, shall be that of the defendants. (e) That if the Income-tax Department accepts and assesses "CHANDRA TRADING CO." Rajagarh Road, S(sic)an, as a "REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM" within the provisions of the Indian Income-tax Act, the entire Income-tax levied on the firm shall be exclusively paid and borne by the defendants themselves and in the event the same is assessed as an UNREGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM, the plaintiffs 1 and 2 shall pay Income-tax in proportion to their respective shares in the partnership for the business carried on upto 15th June, 1973. However, the respective parties shall pay their own Income-tax themselves. (h) That in case the defendants are made to pay any amount payable by the plaintiffs 1 and 2 which amount is payable by the plaintiffs under this compromise the said amount shall be deducted by the defendants from the last amount of instalment payable by the defendants to the plaintiffs." The suit was thus decreed for Rupees 1,50,000/-on terms and conditions mentioned in the compromise.

(2.) The payment was required to be made in five instalments and the last instalment of Rs. 33,000/- was to be paid "by 14th January, 1974." The defendant judgment-debtors did not pay this last instalment and this gave rise to the present execution application.

(3.) The plaintiff decree-holders sought for the execution by arrest of the judgment- debtors and by attachment of the movable properties belonging to them. Upon their application, this Court issued notice to show cause to the judgment-debtors, why they should not be arrested and also issued process for attachment of their movable properties of which a list was supplied by the decree-holders. The attachment of movable properties has since taken effect. The judgment-debtors come up with these two objections. One of their objections is against the very execution, while the other objection relates to the notice issued to them to show cause for their arrest in execution of the decree.