1995 (3) TMI 502 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Commencement of limitation period for filing an application to pass a final decree on stamped papers.
2. Interpretation of preliminary and final decrees under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).
3. Applicability of the Limitation Act, 1908.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Commencement of Limitation Period for Filing an Application to Pass a Final Decree on Stamped Papers:

The core issue is determining when the limitation period begins for filing an application to pass a final decree on stamped papers. The High Court held that the limitation began from the date the direction was given to pass the final decree. However, this view was contested. The Supreme Court clarified that mere direction to supply stamped paper does not amount to passing a final decree. Until the final decree is drawn up, engrossed on stamped paper, and signed, there is no executable decree. Therefore, limitation begins only after these steps are completed.

2. Interpretation of Preliminary and Final Decrees under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC):

Order 20 Rule 7 of CPC mandates that a decree shall bear the date of judgment and be signed by the judge once satisfied it aligns with the judgment. Section 2(2) of CPC defines a decree as a formal expression of an adjudication determining the rights of the parties. A preliminary decree declares the rights and liabilities, while a final decree fully determines these rights. Both decrees are part of the same suit. The final decree becomes final either when the appeal period expires without an appeal or when decided by the highest court. The final decree fulfills the preliminary decree.

Order 20 Rule 18(2) specifies that in partition suits, a preliminary decree declares the rights of the parties, and a final decree specifies the division by metes and bounds, engrossed on stamped paper. The preliminary decree in this case declared the shares of the parties but did not effectuate the partition, which required a final decree.

3. Applicability of the Limitation Act, 1908:

Since the decree predates the Limitation Act, 1963, the provisions of the Limitation Act, 1908, apply. Article 182 of the First Schedule to the old Act provides a three-year limitation period for executing a decree, starting from the date of the final order. The Supreme Court emphasized that until a final decree is drawn up and engrossed on stamped paper, there is no executable decree. The preliminary decree only declared the rights without finalizing the partition, thus no limitation period for execution began.

Conclusion:

The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, setting aside the High Court's judgments and confirming the trial court's decision. The trial court was directed to pass the final decree, engross it on the stamped papers supplied by the appellants, and proceed with the execution. The parties were directed to bear their own costs throughout. The judgment clarified that limitation for executing a final decree begins only after the final decree is drawn up and engrossed on stamped paper, providing a clear interpretation of the procedural requirements under the CPC and the applicability of the Limitation Act, 1908.