9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Challenge to order transferring execution application to Debts Recovery Tribunal based on legal fiction under section 44A(1) of CPC and jurisdiction of the Tribunal. Analysis: Issue 1: Legal Fiction under Section 44A(1) of CPC - Appellant challenged transfer of execution application to Debts Recovery Tribunal, citing section 44A(1) of CPC. - Appellant argued that legal fiction under section 44A(1) only allows execution in district court's original jurisdiction, not in Tribunal. - Cited Privy Council and Supreme Court judgments on legal fictions and consequences. - Court held that Tribunal's exclusive jurisdiction under RDB Act extends to foreign decrees, not unjustifiably. - Rejected appellant's argument of extending legal fiction beyond its purpose. Issue 2: Distinction between Sections 38, 39 of CPC and Section 44A - Appellant claimed distinction between execution of domestic decrees (Sec 38, 39) and foreign decrees (Sec 44A). - Noted that Sec 44A allows defences under Sec 13, permitting going behind decree. - Cited Supreme Court judgments emphasizing Sec 44A as part of domestic law for foreign judgments. - Highlighted differences in defences available under Sec 44A compared to Sec 38, 39. - Court clarified that Tribunal can exercise powers of a court under CPC, including defences under Sec 13. Issue 3: Jurisdiction of Debts Recovery Tribunal - Appellant raised concern over jurisdiction shift to Tribunal affecting rights to raise objections. - Court referred to Supreme Court ruling on Tribunal's powers to exercise CPC provisions. - Emphasized Tribunal's jurisdiction to go beyond CPC, ensuring defences under Sec 13 available. - Dismissed appellant's argument on potential loss of rights due to Tribunal's discretion. Conclusion: - Court upheld Single Judge's orders on Chamber Summonses, dismissing both appeals. - Found no errors in transferring execution application to Debts Recovery Tribunal based on legal fiction and Tribunal's jurisdiction under RDB Act. - Rejected appellant's arguments on extending legal fiction, distinctions between CPC sections, and impact on rights before the Tribunal. - Upheld validity of provisions under RDB Act, emphasizing Tribunal's authority to exercise court powers under CPC.
|
