BHURMAL Vs. JAWAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the judgment-debtor Bhuralal against the judgment and decree of the District Judge, Bhilwara, dated the 3rd March, 1952, arising out of certain execution proceedings.

(2.) THE respondent Jiwansingh and his brother Sohansingh (who is represented in this appeal by his assignee Motisingh) filed a suit against the appellant for redemption of a pledge of certain ornaments and obtained a decree on the 28th August, 1940, that they would be entitled to redeem the ornaments on payment of Rs. 547/4/- to the defendant. This decree was confirmed on appeal. On the 30th January, 1943, Sohansingh alone applied for execution of the decree. Some trouble arose as Jiwansingh had not been made a party to the application for execution and, therefore, on the 9th May, 1943, Sohansingh stated that he was asking for execution with respect to his share of the decree. On the 6th February, 1945, the judgment-debtor objected that he had already compromised the decree with one of the decree-holders, Jiwansingh, on the 20th May, 1911. This objection was not decided. On the 18th December, 1946, Moti Singh deposited a sum of Rs. 530/- in court to be paid to the judgment-debtor. On the 21st March, 1947, the execution application was, however, dismissed for the decree holder's default. THEn Motisingh filed a second execution petition on the 15th October, 1947, This application was dismissed on the 20th January, 1949, on the ground that Motisingh alone had no right to execute the decree. This led to a further execution application on the 4th April, 1949, which was filed by both Jiwan Singh and Motisingh and it is this application out of which the present appeal has arisen. Bhuralal raised two objections. (1) that the decree had already been compromised with Jiwan Singh and (2) that the execution application dated the 4th April, 1949, was barred by time. THE executing court repelled both these objections. THE judgment debtor then went in appeal to the District Judge, Bhilwara and the latter modified the decree of the executing court and held that Jiwan Singh was not entitled to execute the decree but Moti Singh as assignee of the other decree-holder Sohan Singh was entitled to execute the decree to the extent of his half share on payment of half the decretal amount allow by the trial court. This appeal has been filed from the above decree