9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Jurisdiction of the executing court in an execution petition filed by the revision petitioner. Analysis: The judgment pertains to a revision petition filed by the second judgment debtor in a case where the decree-holder is a company under liquidation. The revision petitioner contended that the executing court must be a company court, and since the Munsif's court where the execution petition was filed is not a company court, the petition is not maintainable. The court below rejected all objections and directed the execution to proceed. The revision petitioner relied on a decision from the Andhra Pradesh High Court to support the argument that a Munsif's court is not a company court. However, the judge found that the cited decision under the Indian Companies Act, 1913, is relevant. The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that if a certificate is issued by the winding-up court, the certified copy itself is sufficient for executing the decree, and the transferee court gains jurisdiction under the Code of Civil Procedure. The judge emphasized that for execution, the court need not be a company court, as long as the certified copy is produced before a court. The judge dismissed the revision petition, affirming the jurisdiction of the court below to proceed with the execution. In the detailed analysis, the judge explained that the provisions of the Companies Act and the Code of Civil Procedure support the jurisdiction of the court to execute the decree. The judge highlighted the importance of the certified copy of the winding-up court's certificate for execution, stating that no separate order of transfer is required. The judge referenced the decision from the Andhra Pradesh High Court to emphasize that the transferee court does not need to be a company court for execution purposes. The judge concluded that the court below had the jurisdiction to proceed with the execution, leading to the dismissal of the civil revision petition without costs.
|
