(1.) This is an appeal against an order of the Subordinate Judge of Nadia, disallowing objections filed by the judgment-debtors in an execution case under Section 47, Civil Procedure Code.
(2.) A suit in ejectment had been brought against the owners of certain properties represented by one Charu Chandra Ganguli, the common manager appointed under Section 95 of the Bengal Tenancy Act. The suit was eventually compromised and decreed accordingly on the 4th February 1921. Upon execution being taken out, objection was taken by the judgment-debtors that the decree could not be executed because Charu Chunder Ganguli did not represent the estate on the date of decree and also because the leave of the District Judge was not obtained for the compromise.
(3.) On behalf of the decree-holders a preliminary objection was raised in the Court below that the application was not maintainable under Section 47, Civil Procedure Code, in the execution stage the contention being that a separate suit might lie for the purpose of questioning the validity of the decree, but that the Executing Court could not go behind the decree. The learned Subordinate Judge on a consideration of the authorities held that the objections could not be determined in an execution proceeding, and that only those questions which would render a decree void ab initio, so as to affect the jurisdiction of the Court, could be gone into. He accordingly upheld the preliminary objection.