APPLICATION TO EXECUTE A DECREE AGAINST THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF DECEASED JUDGMENT DEBTOR [CD1]
IN
THE COURT OF THE....................
Misc.
Application..................... of.......... 19....................
Under
Section 146 C. P. C.
in
Execution
No...................... of............ 19....................
A.
B....................................................... Decree-Holder.
versus
C. D.................................................
Judgment Debtors.
The Decree-Holder most
respectfully submits as under:
1.
That the judgment debtor
Shri.................... of the decree aforementioned died
on.................... 19.................... and his property has come in the
hands of his legal representatives, the Opposite Parties, being the sons of the
original judgment debtor.
2.
That it is expedient that the decree may be
executed against the opposite parties, the legal representatives of the original
judgment debtor.
3.
That the Opposite Parties may be called for
deposit of the decreetal amount in Court and satisfy the decree.
PRAYER
It, is therefore, most
respectfully prayed that your Hon’our may be pleased to summon the opposite
parties and order them to deposit the decreetal amount in Court.
Dated.................... 19.................... Counsel for
the Decree-Holders.
CASE LAW
Section 146
SCOPE OF THE SECTION
This section is introduced in the
Code with the object of facilitating the exercise of rights by persons in whom
they came to be vested by devolution or assignment. Whether the application for
addition of party under this section is held earlier or simultaneously, the
list is then pending. The only legal order that can be legitimately passed in
these circumstances would be to enquire into the application of the transferee
and to dispute of the compromise petition thereafter. When after passing of
decree and before filing of the appeal against it, the decree holder transfers
his interest and the decree-holder, joined as a respondent dies during the
pendency of the appeal, the transferee can under this section apply for
substitution as a respondent in place of the person already joined as a
respondent in place of the person already joined as a legal representative of
the deceased decree-holder1.
There are various provisions in
the Code prescribing of allowing the doing of an act for which time is fixed or
granted by the Court. In all such cases the Court has powers under this Section
to enlarge the time, even after expiration of the period originally fixed. The
time granted by the Court for payment of costs, while setting aside an ex-pane decree, as a condition
precedent, is not an act prescribed or allowed by the Code. The section does
not apply to such a case. On the other hand, section 151 can however be invoked
in such a case2.
1.
Prahlad Misra v. Narasingha Mahapatra, I. L. R.
(1965) Cut. 523: 32 Cut. L. T. 570.
2.
Kanduri Sahu v. Nidhi Sahu, A.I.R. 1966 Orissa
44: I. L. R. (1965) Cut. 506: 31 Cut. L. T. 757.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.