Full Judgment
C.R.639/2004 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR CIVIL REVISION No.639 of 2004 SINGLE BENCH: JUSTICE A.K.SHRIVASTAVA Applicant : Ramkishan Agarwal, S/o Late Bhagwan Das Agarwal, resident of Main Road, Gotegaon, District Narsinghpur (M.P.) Versus Respondents :
1.
State Bank of India through the Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Gotegaon, Tahsil, Gotegaon, District Narsinghpur (M.P.) 2.
Smt.
Chandabai,W/o Shri Gulab Gir (Telegraphwale).presently residing in front of Hitkarni Garha School, Deotal, Garha, Jabalpur (M.P.) 3.
Shri Preetam Puri, S/o Shri Gulab Puri Goswami, resident of Mahant Bhawan, Shivaji Ward, Kandeli Narsinghpur, District Narsinghpur (M.P.) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Applicant by - Shri K.N.Agrawal, Advocate Respondents by - None --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER
(21/02/2013) Indeed a joint decree has been passed against the applicant and respondents no.2 and 3 for realization of money worth ` 2,59,498/-.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the amount should be realized from the property which is mortgaged and indeed the decree also contemplates so.”
2. Considered the submissions.
C.R.639/200”
3.
On bare perusal of the impugned order this Court finds that repeatedly an attachment warrant was being issued upon the judgment-debtors for realization of the decretal amount but they were avoiding the attachment warrant and every time the report was received that they had gone out of Station.
The judgment- debtor no.1 namely Smt.
Chandabai was not directed to be sent to civil prison being a lady but upon application filed under Order 21 Rule 37 CPC by the decree-holder/respondent no.1, objections were raised that they cannot be sent to civil prison.
The learned Executing Court rightly came to hold that repeatedly the attachment warrant could not be served upon the judgment- debtors and, therefore, in order to satisfy the decretal amount last resort was taken by sending the judgment-debtors to civil prison, hence rejected the application of judgment-debtors praying that they cannot be sent to the civil prison.”
4. I have gone through the order passed by learned Executing Court and I do not find that by passing the impugned order the learned Executing Court has committed any illegality or material irregularity in exercise of its jurisdiction.
On bare perusal of the order-sheets of this Court and by paying heed to the order dated 11.10.2004 of this Court, it is fond that the impugned order of learned Executing Court against judgment-debtor no.2 namely Shri Preetam Puri was directed to be stayed and that order is still continuing.
Learned counsel for the applicant-judgment-debtor C.R.639/2004 3 no.3 in not in a position to say whether the decree has been satisfied in its full satisfaction.
Since the impugned order of learned Executing Court was stayed only against respondent no.3, by efflux of time which is near about 9 years the decree must have been satisfied.
However, if still the decretal amount has not been realized, the applicant and other judgment-debtors are fee to get it deposited in the Executing Court failing which the Executing Court shall be free to proceed in accordance with law against them.”
5. With the aforesaid observations, this revision application is disposed of.
(A.K.Shrivastava) Judge 21.02.2013 rao