TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Decree must comply with procedural requirements for enforceability</h1> <h3>Padma Ben Banushali and Ors. Versus. Yogendra Rathore and Ors.</h3> Padma Ben Banushali and Ors. Versus. Yogendra Rathore and Ors. - TMI Issues Involved:1. Executability of the decree.2. Adjustment and certification under Order XXI Rule 2 CPC.3. Conscious waiver of rights by the decree-holder.4. Harmonious construction of Section 47 and Order XXI Rule 2 CPC.Detailed Analysis:1. Executability of the Decree:The primary issue in this case was whether the decree obtained by the plaintiff-landlord was executable. The High Court had held that the decree was not executable due to a conscious waiver by the decree-holder. The appellants contended that the High Court's decision was based on erroneous premises and that the decree remained executable as there was no conscious waiver.2. Adjustment and Certification under Order XXI Rule 2 CPC:The appellants argued that the adjustment of the decree, if any, was not certified as required under Order XXI Rule 2 CPC. The Court noted that for an adjustment to be recognized, it must be certified by the executing court. The respondents had claimed that the decree was adjusted through an agreement, but this adjustment was not certified. The Court emphasized that an uncertified adjustment cannot be recognized by the executing court, thus supporting the appellants' position.3. Conscious Waiver of Rights by the Decree-Holder:The respondents argued that the decree-holder had consciously waived their rights to execute the decree. However, the Court found that the agreement not to execute the decree was conditional upon the execution of a sale-deed, which had not been fulfilled. Therefore, the Court concluded that there was no conscious waiver, and the decree-holder's rights remained intact.4. Harmonious Construction of Section 47 and Order XXI Rule 2 CPC:The Court discussed the need for a harmonious construction of Section 47 and Order XXI Rule 2 CPC. Section 47 deals with the power of the court executing the decree, while Order XXI Rule 2 deals with the procedure for certifying adjustments. The Court emphasized that both provisions should be interpreted to avoid conflicts and to give effect to the legislative intent. The Court concluded that the general power under Section 47 must yield to the specific provisions of Order XXI Rule 2, which require certification of adjustments.Conclusion:The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order, holding that the decree remained executable as there was no conscious waiver and the adjustment was not certified as required by Order XXI Rule 2 CPC. The appeal was allowed, and the Court emphasized the importance of following the procedural requirements for certifying adjustments to ensure the enforceability of decrees.
TaxTMI 