Executing court cannot add interest beyond the decree; recall or review of the prior deletion order was also rejected.

An executing court cannot go beyond the decree under execution and may not add interest that was not awarded in the decree itself. The settled rule applied was that execution must remain confined to the terms of the decree as drawn, so earlier authorities did not justify enlarging the relief by granting interest. The prior order deleting such interest was therefore consistent with the binding legal position. A request to recall or review that order was also rejected, as the applicant had already been heard on merits and no basis was found to reopen the concluded decision.

---

---

Issues: Whether the executing court could award interest when the decree under execution did not grant interest, and whether the earlier order setting aside such interest required review.

Analysis: The settled rule applied was that an executing court must confine itself to the decree as drawn and cannot enlarge the relief by adding interest not awarded by the decree-holder court. The earlier authorities relied upon did not support a contrary proposition, and the decision approving deletion of interest was held to be consistent with the binding legal position. The plea for recall or review on the ground of absence of hearing was rejected after the applicant was heard on merits, as no basis was found to reopen the concluded order.

Conclusion: The award of interest by the executing court was impermissible, and the prayer to review or recall the prior order was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: An executing court cannot go beyond the decree under execution and cannot grant interest not forming part of the decree.

---