HARBANS PROSAD SINGH Vs. JADUNANDAN RAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal from an order of the District Judge of Muzaffarpur in which he held that an application for execution was barred by limitation. A decree was passed on 22 September, 1932 by the Second Munsif of Muzaffarpur. On 8th August 1935, an application was made to the First Munsif for execution. The Court required a certificate of transfer which was obtained from the Second Munsif's Court on 9 August and filed on 29 August.

(2.) Therefore the application for execution (all other things being equal) was complete. But it was subsequently found that the properties which the decree- holder desired to attach were in Sitamarhi district and a further application for transfer was made, but at a time which was beyond three years of the date of the decree. Unless the decree-holder can take advantage of the applications before the Second Munsif and the First Munsif of Muzaffarpur, he is clearly barred by limitation as the Judge in the Court below has held.

(3.) I should have stated that the trial Court had held that the application for execution could not proceed or at least, the sale was not valid by reason of the fact that there were irregularities inasmuch as various notices had not been served, but against that decision there appears to have been no appeal by the decree-holder. I mention that fact for the purpose of a matter which we shall have in a moment to consider.