KEDAR NATH SAHU Vs. PARSIDH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal, which is by the decree-holders, the question for determination is whether the execution of an instalment rent decree, filed more than three years after the date of the decree, is barred under Art. 6 of Schedule 3, Bihar Tenancy Act. The decree under execution was passed on compromise for Rs. 250 on 10th December 1936, the amount being payable in three instalments, i.e., Rs. 100 on 30 December 1937, Rs. 50 on 15 March 1938 and Rs. 100 on 30 December 1938. The decree provided that in case of default of payment of the first two instalments, the entire decree would be executable. The judgment-debtors made no payment at all towards the decree. The decree-holders applied for execution of the decree on 20 December 1941. The judgment-debtors took objection to the execution on the ground that it was barred by limitation under Art. 6 of Schedule 3, Bihar" Tenancy Act. The learned Munsif upheld the judgment-debtor's objection and dismissed the execution ease. On appeal, his decision was affirmed by the learned Subordinate Judge. Hence this appeal by the decree-holders. The point taken by Mr. Raj kishore Prasad on behalf of the appellants is that an instalment rent decree is not covered by the provisions of Art. 6 of Schedule 3, Bihar Tenancy Act, and therefore it will be governed by Art. 182, Clause (7) of Schedule 1, Limitation Act. Now, Section 184 (1), Bihar Tenancy Act, provides: The suits, appeals and applications specified in Schedule 3 annexed to this Act shall be instituted and made within the time prescribed in that schedule for them respectively; and every such suit or appeal instituted, and application made, after the period of limitation so prescribed, shall be dismissed, although limitation has not been pleaded.

(2.) Art. 6 of Schedule 3, Bihar Tenancy Act, is as follows: 6. For the execu?tion of a decree or order made in a suit between landlord and tenant to whom the provisions of this Act are applicable and not being a decree for a sum of money exceeding Rs. 500, exclusive of any interest which may have accrued after decree upon the sum decreed, but in?clusive of the costs of executing such decree; except where the judgment-debtor has by fraud or force prevented the execution of the decree, in which case the period of limitation shall be governed by the pro?vision of the Indian Limitation Act, 1877. Three years (1) The date of the decree or order; or (2) Where there has been an ap?peal, the date of the final decree or order of the ap?pellate Court; or (3) Where there has been a review of judgment, the date of the deci? sion passed on the review.

(3.) Section 29 (2), Limitation Act, says: Where any special or local law prescribes for any suit, appeal or application a period of limitation different from the period prescribed therefor by Schedule 1, the provisions of Section 3 shall apply, aB if such period were prescribed therefor in that schedule.