SANTOSH RANI Vs. CANARA BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been filed by Santosh Rani and other petitioners directed against the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jagadhri, dated 23.12.1997. By virtue of the impugned order, the learned trial Court dismissed the objections filed by the petitioners.

(2.) The relevant facts are that the respondent Canara Bank had filed a civil suit for recovery of Rs. 60,654/- on account of Principal and interest due against the firm M/s. Mukand Lal Sharma and Sons. The partners of the said partnership firm were also arrayed as defendants. One of the said partners was Mukand Lal Sharma. During the pendency of the suit, he had died. The present petitioners were impleaded as legal representatives. The Civil Suit was decreed by the learned trial Court on 1.6.1992 with costs against the defendant-petitioners jointly and severally. Future interest was also awarded. The respondent-Bank filed execution application. Therein objections were filed by the petitioners stating that they were not liable to pay any decretal amount. It was alleged that M/s. Mukand Lal Sharma and Sons was a partnership concern. The legal representatives of Mukand Lal Sharma were not the partners. They had not inherited anything from the estate of the deceased or taken possession of any property of the partnership firm. Therefore, they are not liable to pay the decretal amount. The objections were contested by the respondent-decree-holder. It was alleged that the decree has been passed against the petitioners jointly and severally. The Executing Court cannot go behind the decree. The petitioners are stated to have stepped into the shoes of late Mukand Lal Sharma and, therefore, they are presently liable to pay the decretal amount. It was denied that nothing has been inherited.

(3.) Learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jagadhri, vide the impugned order held that Mukand Lal Sharma had died and his legal representatives were impleaded. A decree was passed against the firm as well as the partners. It was passed jointly and severally against the defendant-petitioners. The Court cannot go behind the decree and thus legal representatives of Mukand Lal Sharma were liable to pay the decretal amount. Aggrieved by the said order, present revision petition has been filed.