Rai & Ors Vs. Ram Udar Rai & Ors  Insc 27 (18 January 2006)
Pasayat & Tarun Chatterjee Arijit Pasayat, J.
High Court of Patna dismissed the Civil Revision filed by the appellant
summarily. Challenge in the Civil Revision was to the order passed by the
learned Subordinate Judge, VII, Patna, in execution proceedings. By the said order Subordinate Judge held
that the plea raised by the appellant about the execution petition being barred
by time in terms of Article 136 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (in short the
'Limitation Act') was untenable.
Subordinate Judge held that the period of limitation starts running not from
the date of decree, but when the decree becomes enforceable i.e. when it is
support of the appeal strong reliance was placed on several decisions of this
Court i.e. W.B. Essential Commodities Supply Corpn. v. Swadesh Agro Farming
& Storage Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. (1999 (8) SCC 315), Hameed Joharan (Dead) and
Ors. v. Abdul Salam (Dead) by Lrs. And Ors. (2001 (7) SCC 573).
Joharan's case (supra) it was held after referring to the meaning to the word
'enforce' from various dictionaries words 'when the decree or order becomes
enforceable' should be read in literal sense and as per intention of the legislators
12 years period is to be reckoned from the date the decree became enforceable
i.e. the date of the decree or order.
contra, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the correct position
of law is expressed in Shankar Balant Lokhande (Dead) by LRs. v. Chandrakant S.
Lokhande & Anr. (1995 (3) SCC 413) and in other two cases the correct
principles in law were not kept in view. We find that there is some area of
conflict amongst several two-judge Bench decisions. It is also to be noticed
that noticing the conflict between these judgments, reference has been made to
a three-Judge Bench in Chiranji Lal (dead) by Lrs. Hari Das (dead) by Lrs.
(2005 (2) SCC 261).
case may also be placed before Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India for appropriate
orders to be placed alongwith Chiranji Lal's case (supra).