https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96662 An executing court may recognise, on general principles and inherent power, a claim for adjustment of money withdrawn under a cost decree that was later reversed, even if the claim does not fall strictly within Order 21 Rule 19 CPC. The right to seek restoration accrued only when the appellate process finally determined entitlement, so the objection on limitation failed. Credit was not available for amounts paid towards revenue and cess, because those dues were liabilities of the original proprietors and not of the mortgagee respondent. Adjustment was therefore confined to the amount recovered under the reversed cost decree, and the balance claim was rejected. en-us Sat, 11 Aug 1934 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Jan 2012 12:08:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96662 An executing court may recognise, on general principles and inherent power, a claim for adjustment of money withdrawn under a cost decree that was later reversed, even if the claim does not fall strictly within Order 21 Rule 19 CPC. The right to seek restoration accrued only when the appellate process finally determined entitlement, so the objection on limitation failed. Credit was not available for amounts paid towards revenue and cess, because those dues were liabilities of the original proprietors and not of the mortgagee respondent. Adjustment was therefore confined to the amount recovered under the reversed cost decree, and the balance claim was rejected. Case-Laws Companies Law Sat, 11 Aug 1934 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96662