- (1.) These two revision petitions are decided together as the same arise out of the common order dated 1.11.2011, vide which the application moved by the respondents for recording of the statement of the petitioners was allowed. The factual back ground of the case is that an award dated 29.4.2004 for recovery of Rs. 26,79,178/- was passed by the Arbitrator against M/s Shiva Rice and General Mill-respondent No. 2, as well as Gian Chand Jindal (the sole proprietor of the firm). The award attained finality. However, before execution was filed on 9.3.2009, Gian Chand, the sole proprietor died on 1.6.2008. Respondent No. 2 without impleading the legal representatives of the deceased Gian Chand filed execution and moved an application under Order 21 Rule 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure for directing the legal representatives of the judgment-debtor i.e. deceased Gian Chand to appear in the Court for the purpose of examination.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that since the execution is inherently defective as the same was filed against the dead person without impleading his legal representatives, therefore, they could not be summoned by the court for making such statement, unless they are treated as successors-in-interest (legal representatives) of the judgment debtor/Gian Chand.
(3.) To the contrary, learned counsel for the respondents has urged that the court is vested with all the powers to summon and examine any person for satisfaction of the decree. Order 21 Rule 41 of the Code reads as under:- 41. Examination of judgment-debtor as to his property. [(1)] Where a decree is for the payment of money the decree holder may apply to the Court for an order that (a) the judgment-debtor, or (b) [where the judgment-debtor is a corporation], any officer thereof, or (c) any other person, be orally examined as to whether any or what debts are owing to the judgment-debtor and whether the judgment-debtor has any and what other property or means of satisfying the decree; and the Court may make an order for the attendance and examination of such judgment-debtor, or officer or other person, and for the production of any books or documents. [(2) Where a decree for the payment of money has remained unsatisfied for a period of thirty days, the Court may, on the application of the decree-holder and without prejudice to its power under sub-rule (1), by order require the judgment-debtor or where the judgment-debtor is a corporation any officer thereof, to make an affidavit stating the particulars of the assets of the judgment-debtor. (3) In case of disobedience of any order made under sub-rule (2), the Court making the order, or any Court to which the proceeding is transferred, may direct that the person disobeying the order be detained in the civil prison for a term not exceeding three months unless before the expiry of such term the Court directs his release.];