SHRIRAM GANGABISAN Vs. BAJRANGLAL GOKULCHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned Civil Judge (Class 2), Ellichpur, recorded a finding under Section 476, Criminal P. C, on 17 August 1946 to the effect that it was expedient in the interests of justice that Shri Bam, who is the applicant in this Court, should be prosecuted, and he decided to make a complaint. Shri Barn's appeal from that order was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ellichpur.

(2.) The contention that has been raised in this revision petition is that the two lower Courts could not take into consideration in the proceedings under Section 476, Criminal P. C, the uncertified or unrecorded adjustment of us. 922-8-0 in view of Sub-rule (3) of Rule 2 of Order 21, Civil P. C.

(3.) Sub-rule (3) is as follows: A payment or adjustment, which has not been certified or recorded as aforesaid, shall not be recognised by any Court executing the decree. Section 176, Criminal P. C, lays down the procedure of making a complaint regarding any of fence (referred to in B. 195 Sub-section (l) Clause (b) or Clause (c)) which appears to have been committed in or in relation to a proceeding in a civil, revenue or criminal Court, The proceeding before the learned Civil Judge (Class 2), Ellichpur, in relation to which the offence is alleged to have been committed was an execution proceeding, It is contended that that Court was a Court "execution the decree" not only during those execution proceedings but also during the subsequent proceedings under Section 476, Criminal P. C, and while making a complaint in writing and so it could not recognise the uncertified or unrecorded adjustment.