Final decree cannot be reopened in execution; set-off claims and alleged credits were rejected as unsupported and legally unavailable.

A final misfeasance decree could not be reopened or varied in execution, and the Court held that Section 47 of the Presidency Town Insolvency Act did not authorise adjustment of the decretal liability on the grounds advanced. Section 70 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 was held inapplicable on the facts. An old 1958 balance sheet was treated as irrelevant after the 1965 winding-up order, and alleged credits for payments to third parties were rejected as disputed factual claims unsupported by the record. The applicant therefore received no set-off or reduction of liability.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant could seek reopening of the satisfied misfeasance decree, claim set-off of rents realised by the Official Liquidator, rely on an old balance sheet to reduce decretal liability, and obtain credit for alleged prior payments to third parties.

Analysis: The decree had attained finality, and the Court held that it had no authority to reopen or vary it in execution. Section 47 of the Presidency Town Insolvency Act did not permit reopening of the decree or adjustment of the decretal amount on the basis claimed, and Section 70 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 was found inapplicable on the facts. The claim based on a balance sheet of 1958 was rejected as irrelevant after the winding-up order of 1965. The alleged payments to Mohta Brothers and O.P. Mohta were treated as disputed questions of fact unsupported by the record.

Conclusion: The applicant was not entitled to the reliefs sought, and the application failed.

---