Advocate Sushila
SUPREME COURT CONCLUDES HALF-A-CENTURY OLD LITIGATION IN THE MATTER OF EXECUTION OF A MONEY DECREE
Advocate Sushila Ram 16 Oct 2021

SUPREME COURT CONCLUDES HALF-A-CENTURY OLD LITIGATION IN THE MATTER OF EXECUTION OF A MONEY DECREE

The Two Judge Bench of the #SupremeCourt has in the matter of Dipali Biswas v Nirmalendu Mukherjee passed a Judgment dated 05-10-2021 and made the following observations in a half-a-century old #litigation, which is at the stage of execution of a simple #moneydecree that started in 1971 and is still continuing its fifth round of litigation before the Apex Court.


In this case, the long pending litigation started as follows:

1)       One, Ms. Rama Rani Devi had filed a suit for recovery in a Money Suit in the year 1971 before the District Court, Bongaon, District 24 Parganas, West Bengal, against one, Mr. Sasadhar Biswas for recovery of Rs. 3000/-.

2)       The District Court passed an ex-parte Decree dated 25-07-1974, thereby directing the Defendant, Mr. Biswas to pay the decretal amount in six equal instalments.

3)       However, the Defendant failed to honour the Decree, hence, the Decree Holder filed an Execution Petition in 1975 seeking attachment and sale of a plot of land in Bongaon (Property). The Executing Court issued a Sale Proclamation on 16-07-1975. As per Order 21 Rule 66 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 (CPC), where any property is ordered to be sold by public auction in execution of a decree, the Court shall cause a proclamation of the intended sale

4)       Thereafter, the Judgment Debtor- Mr. Biswas filed an Application in 1975 to challenge the said Sale Proclamation issued by the Executing Court, on the ground of material irregularity and fraud, which was dismissed on 03-09-1975.


5)       Thereafter, an Auction Sale was held on 30-05-1979, whereby, two brothers, Mr. Sachindra Nath Mukherjee and Mr. Dulal Kanti Mukherjee, emerged as the highest bidders. They offered a sum of Rs. 5500/-, as the highest bid amount and also deposited the money in Court.

6)       The Judgement Debtor filed an Application before Executing Court in 1979 seeking setting aside of the Auction Sale on the ground of material irregularity in the Sale Proclamation.

7)       During the pendency of this Application, the Judgment Debtor entered into a Compromise with the Auction-Purchasers which recorded that the Judgment Debtor would pay the entire money due to the Auction-Purchasers in cash, within 15-12-1980, after which the Auction shall be revoked and in case, he is unable to meet the deadline, then Auction would remain effective. However, the amount to be paid was not clearly specified in the said Compromise Memo. The decretal amount was around Rs. 3360/-, but the amount deposited by the Auction-Purchasers in the Court was Rs. 5500/-. The Judgement Debtor deposited around Rs. 3700/- on 15-12-1980 and failed to deposit the balance amount of Rs. 1800/- within the given timelines. Hence, the Executing Court dismissed the said Application, vide Order dated 16-12-1980.

8)       However, the Executing Court later recalled its Order dated 16-12-1980 on 20-12-1980 and held that the Execution has been fully satisfied.

9)       Aggrieved, the Auction-Purchasers filed an Application on 22-12-1980 challenging the Executing Court’s decision to recall its earlier Order dated 16-12-1980 behind its back. But the said Application was dismissed by the Executing Court, vide Order dated 12-09-1981.

 

To read more, please visit the link below:


https://theindianlawyer.in/supreme-court-concludes-half-a-century-old-litigation-in-the-matter-of-execution-of-a-money-decree/


#supremecourt #litigation #execution #moneydecree

Did you find this write up useful? YES 0 NO 0
Featured Members view all

New Members view all

×

C2RMTo Know More

Something Awesome Is In The Work

0

DAYS

0

HOURS

0

MINUTES

0

SECONDS

Sign-up and we will notify you of our launch.
We’ll also give some discount for your effort :)

* We won’t use your email for spam, just to notify you of our launch.