BHAWANI SHANKER Vs. MAHANT RAMODARACHARIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a decree-holder's appeal against an order of the District Judge Jaipur city holding that his execution application was barred by limitation.

(2.) ONE Bala Bux obtained a decree for Rs. 12,994/- against the Mahant of Thikana Galtaji on 5. 1. 1913 from the Adalat Diwani Jaipur. The decree was assigned to the predecessor of the present decree-holder Bhawani Shankar. The decree was put into execution by Bachat under the Jaipur Bachat Rules 1945 framed under Order 21 Rule 30 of the Jaipur Code of Civil Procedure. Rule 30 of Order 21 of that Code ran as follows - "every decree for the payment of money including a decree for the payment of money as the alternative to some other relief, may be executed by the detention in the civil prison of the judgment-debtor, or by the attachment and sale of his property, or by both. Provided that the High Court may, either of its own motion or otherwise, order execution of such a decree by Bachat in accordance with the rules framed by the Government. "

(3.) THE first question which arises for determination is whether the Jaipur Bachat Rules continued in force after the repeal of the Jaipur Civil Procedure Code and the enforcement of the present Code of Civil Procedure. It was held in State of Punjab Vs. Mohan Singh (1) that sec. 6 of the General Clauses Act would be applicable even when the repeal of an enactment is followed by fresh legislation unless the new legislation manifests an intention incompatible with or contrary to the provisions of the section. THE Jaipur Bachat Rules have not been expressly repealed so far. THE execution of a decree under these Rules cannot be said to be incompatible with the present Code of Civil Procedure. Rule 30 of Order 21 ~ of the present Code of Civil Procedure is exactly the same as the first part of Rule 30 of Order 21 of the Jaipur Civil Procedure Code. Under that Code a decree for payment of money could be executed in the manner in which it can be now executed and decrees against certain classes of grantees to whom the Bachat Rules were applicable could also be executed under the Bachat Rules. THE two modes of execution stood together side by side under the Jaipur Civil Procedure Code. THEy cannot be regarded as repugnant to one another. THE effect of sec. 6 of the General Clauses Act therefore is that the Bachat Rules continued in force even after 25. 1. 50. No fresh applications could however be made for execution in Bachat after 25. 1. 50. But the judgment-debtors and decree-holders whose decrees were being executed by Bachat could continue to be executed even after 25. 1. 50 under the Bachat Rules till they were fully satisfied. This is also the effect of sec. 14 of the Ordinance referred to above.