JAGAT NARAYAN, J. - (1.) THIS is a revision application by the judgment-debtor against an order of the executing court which was confirmed on appeal by the Senior Civil Judge, Jalore.
(2.) GULAB Singh respondent obtained a decree against Deep Singh applicant restraining the latter from interfering with his possession over a piece of land ABCD. The demolition of wall AB constructed by Deep Singh over this land was also ordered under the decree. Deep Singh disobeyed the order of permanent injunction and constructed a Bad AB and began to use land ABCD for tying his cattle and for other purposes. The decree-holder thereupon put his decree into execution under order 21, rule 32 (1) C. P. C. , which runs as follows: - "rule 32 (1) - Where the party against whom a decree for the specific performance of a contract, or for restitution of conjugal rights, or for an injunction, has 'been passed, has had, an opportunity of obeying the decree and has wilfully failed to obey it, the decree may be enforced in the case of a decree for restitution of conjugal rights by the attachment of his property or, in the case of a decree for the specific performance of a contract or for an injunction by his detention in the civil prison, or by the attachment of his property, or by both. " The courts below found that the allegation made by the decree-holder was true. They ordered his detention in civil prison for a period of three months and also ordered the attachment of his house. Against this order the present revision application has been filed. The contention on behalf of the applicant is that the order is in excess of jurisdiction inasmuch as under sec. 58 C. P. C. the judgment-debtor could have been detained for a maximum period of six week and was liable to be released from detention before the expiration of the period on complying with the decree. Sec. 58 runs as follows: - "sec. 58 - (1) Every person detained in the civil prison in execution of a decree shall be so detained, - (a) where the decree is for a payment of a sum of money exceeding fifty rupees, for a period of six months, and (b) in any other case for a period of six weeks: Provided that he shall be released from such detention before the expiration of the said period of six months or six weeks, as the case may be, - (i) on the amount mentioned in the warrant for his detention being paid to the officer in charge of the civil prison, or (ii) on the decree against him being other wise fully satisfied, or (iii) on the request of the person, on whose application he has been so detained, or (iv) on the omission by the person, on whose application he has been so detained, to pay subsistence-allowance; Provided also, that he shall not be released from such detention under clause (ii), or clause (iii), without the order of the court. (2) A judgment-debtor released from deten tion under this section shall not merely by reason of his release be discharged from his debt, but he shall not be liable to be re-arrested under the decree in execution of which he was detained in the civil prison. " The order of the courts below is not in accordance with sec. 58. The maximum period for which the detention of judgment-debtor could have been ordered for committing a breach of decree of permanent injunction under order 21, rule 32 (1) C. P. C. is six weeks. Further the judgment-debtor is entitled to be released from detention before the expiration of this period on showing that he has complied with the decree. I accordingly modify the order of the appellate court and direct that the applicant shall be detained for a maximum period of six weeks subject to the proviso contained in sec. 58. It appears that a Dhalia was constructed by the judgment-debtor on land ABCD before the decree. The decree-holder prayed for the demolition of this Dhalia in his execution application. But this relief was not granted to him. A suggestion was made by me to the judgment-debtor to demolish the Dhalia but he declined to accept it. He has however filed an affidavit stating that he has demolished Bad AB and also removing his possession from land ABCD. The decree-holder has admitted that the Bad AB has been demolished, but he has alleged that the judgment-debtor is still using land ABCD. The executing court shall hold an inquiry whether the decree has been complied with. If the decree has been complied with fully then he will order the release of the judgment-debtor. If not he shall send him to civil jail for a maximum period of six weeks including the period during which he has already remained in detention. Deep Singh was released by the court on executing a personal bond for Rs. 200/ -. He is directed to appear in the executing court within 15 days and shall execute a fresh bond for appearance in that court. The house of the judgment-debtor shall remain under attachment under the provisions of order 21, rule 32 C. P. C. The revision application is decided as indicated above. . ;