https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199076 A decree was held to be executable from the date of its passing because payment of the deficit court fee was not an external contingency but a step within the decree-holder's control, so the decree was not conditional. Time spent in insolvency proceedings and another creditor's execution efforts did not extend limitation for the decree-holder's own execution application. Fraud was found for section 48(2) CPC where concealment, benami arrangements, and denials of ownership were inferred to have prevented execution against property, giving the decree-holder the benefit of a fresh twelve-year period. However, that fraud did not conceal the right to apply for execution itself, so section 18 of the Limitation Act and a fresh starting point under article 182 did not apply. en-us Fri, 01 Dec 1950 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Feb 2018 17:16:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199076 A decree was held to be executable from the date of its passing because payment of the deficit court fee was not an external contingency but a step within the decree-holder's control, so the decree was not conditional. Time spent in insolvency proceedings and another creditor's execution efforts did not extend limitation for the decree-holder's own execution application. Fraud was found for section 48(2) CPC where concealment, benami arrangements, and denials of ownership were inferred to have prevented execution against property, giving the decree-holder the benefit of a fresh twelve-year period. However, that fraud did not conceal the right to apply for execution itself, so section 18 of the Limitation Act and a fresh starting point under article 182 did not apply. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 01 Dec 1950 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199076