PERIASAMI Vs. KRISHNA AYYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question which has been referred to a Full Bench is as follows: "When there are two or more joint decree-holders, and the execution of the decree is barred by limitation as against one or more of them, whether one who is not so barred owing to minority can execute the decree for the benefit of all or, if not, for his own benefit alone? "In other words, whether the minority of one of several joint decree-holders saves the execution of the decree from being time-barred during the minority of the minor plus three years.

(2.) In the case in which the order of reference was made, the material facts and dates were as follow: On June 30th, 1892, a joint decree was passed in favour of three brothers who, at the date of the decree, were all minors. On January 8th, 1896, the last application for execution previous to the present application was made. At this date two of the brothers had attained majority and one was minor. On February 25th, 1899, the present application was made. The youngest brother had attained majority less than three years before the application.

(3.) The first question for determination is--Are joint execution-creditors "joint creditors" within the meaning of Section 8 of the Limitation Act? In my opinion they are not. This view has been adopted by all the High Courts. See Seshan V/s. Rajagopala I.L.R. 13 Mad. 236, Anando Kishore Dass Bakshi V/s. Anando Kishore Bose I.L.R. 14 Calc. 50, Zamir Hasan v. Sundar I.L.R. 22 All. 199, and Govindram V/s. Tatia I.L.R. 20 Bom. 383.