GIAN CHAND Vs. JAGAN NATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON 11-3-1947 Jagan Nath brought a suit for the partition of certain joint property and for rendition of accounts. This was referred to an arbitrator, who made his award in February 1949, and on 9-4-1949 the Court ordered that a decree be made in terms of the award with certain modifications agreed to by the parties. The decree had to be drawn up on stamp-paper and the court directed this to be done, but, as the stamp-paper was not furnished for some days, the me was consigned to the record-room.

(2.) ON 8-3-1952 Jagan Nath made two applications -- one for the execution of the decree and the second for the determination of the value of the stamp-paper to be supplied for the decree so that a formal decree could be drawn up. On the execution application, of course, the Court official reported that no formal decree had till then been drawn up and, therefore, there was nothing to execute. This execution application was consequently kept pending by order of the Court. The other application was considered by the Court, but before any determination, Jagan Nath on 18-3-1952 put in another application stating that he had found that the stamp payable was to be of the value of Rs. 1,775/- and he was therefore filing such stamp-paper in Court so that the decree might be prepared. On 20-3-1952 the Court directed notice to be issued to the judgment-debtor to show cause why the decree should not be pre pared as prayed by Jagan Nath. Proceedings were kept pending in Court for some time, and in July 1952 it was pointed out on behalf of Jagan Nath that the value of the stamp-paper to be furnished had been wrongly calculated and that stamp of the value of Rs. 575/- was returnable to Jagan Nath. The Court considered the matter and agreed with this view and directed on 26-7-1952 that stamp-paper of the value of Rs. 575/- should be refunded. On 10-10-1952 a formal decree was drawn up on the stamp-paper.

(3.) THE opposite party, Gian Chand and others, appeared in the executing Court and raised a number of objections to the execution proceedings. It was said that the decree had not been drawn up on stamp-paper of sufficient value, that the execution application was in any case time-barred, and that the original execution application had been presented in the Court of the. District Judge and by that Court transferred to the executing Court which was not in order, and further that the decree required compulsory registration. The executing Court overruled all these objections, finding no force in any of them. Gian Chand and others, thereupon, appealed to this court and the appeal was heard by Kapur J. , before whom only two questions were raised-