MT KHODAIJTUL KUBRA Vs. UGRAH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These four appeals arise out of four execution proceedings and may be dealt with by one judgment as the point involved in them is the same. It appears that in one of the cases before us a rent decree was obtained by the appellant on 31st January 1936 and in the other three cases on 21 July 1936. In each case the appellant decree-holder made an application to the proper Court for execution on 30 January 1939. The applications were registered and the decree-holder was ordered to file the requisites by 7 February in one of the cases and by 10th February in the other eases. The above order not being complied with, the execution cases were dismissed on 8 and 10 February 1939 respectively. The present application for execution has been made in all these cases on 28 July 1941 and the only question which is involved in these appeals is whether the execution is barred by limitation. This point arises upon the concurrent decision of the two Courts below that the execution is barred.

(2.) The answer to the question which has been raised in these appeals depends upon whether the applications for execution made on 30 January 1939 were applications made in accordance with law. The prayer which was made in these applications was as follows: It is prayed that in the above suit upon the application being registered and after taking the proper steps and issuing the necessary processes the decretal amount be realised by the attachment and sale of the property which is the subject of talika.

(3.) Talika means an inventory and one would have expected that an inventory of the properties which the decree-holder wanted to be attached and sold would be supplied in the application. But as a matter of fact no such list or inventory was supplied. The point which was raised in the Courts below was that the application was not in accordance with law because it did not comply with the provisions of Order 21, Rule 13. This rule reads as follows: Where an application is made for the attachment of any immoveable property belonging to a judgment-debtor, it shall contain at the foot (a) a description of such property sufficient to identify the same and, in case such property can be identified by boundaries or numbers in a record of settlement or survey a specification of such boundaries or numbers; and (b) a specification of the judgment-debtors share or interest in such property to the best of the belief of the applicant, and so far as he has been able to ascertain the same.