RAM BADAN SINGH Vs. RAM PARGASH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal raises a question of law, and it is unfortunate that the respondent is not represented.

(2.) Briefly the facts are these: The appellant holds a decree for money against one Ram Pargash Singh. The final decree in the case was made on 16 March, 1922. The decree-holder Ram Badan Singh was the judgment-debtor in a decree held by two persons Ram Harakh and Mst. Rup Kali. The decree in favour of these two parsons was passed sometime in 1907. In 1922 Ram Harakh and Rup Kali sought the execution of that decree by the attachment of the decree held by Ram Badan against Ram Pargash. On an application being made by Ram Harakh and Rup Kali an order was passed for the attachment of the decree held by Ram Badan Singh. The application was, however, struck off for default of prosecution on the 23 of December, 1922. The attachment was consequently automatically removed. On 16bh March, 1923, Earn Badan Singh sought the execution of his decree by the arrest of Ram Pargash. Ram Pargash was arrested and brought into Court. On that date a certificate of satisfaction of the decree held by Ram Harakh and Rup Kali was granted by the decree holders. The Court of the first instance held that the certificate of satisfaction was a collusive transaction and did not exonerate Ram Pargash from paying the money due by him to Ram Badan under the decree held by the latter. The lower Appellate Court however, held the contrary view with the result that Ram Badan's decree was found to be inexecutable.

(3.) In this Court it has been urged that assuming that Ram Pargash did really pay the decretal amount due to Ram Badan to Ram Haiakh and Rup Kali, this payment made out of Court was not valid at law and did not result in the satisfaction of the decree held by Ram Badan Singh.