9911796707
TMI Blog1950 (8) TMI 10X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion application was made, by the Liquidator to the District Judge who transferred it to the Civil Judge. It was in the last mentioned Court that the objection which has to be considered in this appeal was filed by the judgment-debtor. Inter alia it was contended that the execution application was time barred. The judgment-debtor's case was that Article 182, which provides three years' period of limitation, applied; while according to the decree-holder Article 183 with twelve years' limitation was applicable. Learned Civil Judge agreed with the judgment-Debtor's contention and dismissed the execution application as time barred. Article 182 is applicable to applications "for the execution of a decree or order of any civil Court not provided for by Article 183 or by section 48 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908." Article 183 applies inter alia to applications for enforcing "a judgment, decree or order of any Court established by Royal Charter in the exercise of its ordinary original civil jurisdiction." The decree-holder's contention is that the order which was passed by this Court under section 186 of the Companies Act was an order of the nature contemplated by Article 183. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A case is of a criminal nature where the object is to punish a wrong. A case is of a revenue nature where it relates to taxation, e.g., income-tax. In the present case inasmuch as the order passed was for the payment of money it was clearly of a civil nature. It may be noted here that a decree was prepared in this Court following the order passed by it on 15th September, 1942, and at the top of that decree, there are the words "civil jurisdiction." It shows that this Court purported to exercise civil jurisdiction when it passed this order. The matter is concluded by a Full Bench decision of this Court in Dehra Dun Mussoorie Electric Tramway Co., Ltd., V. President, Council of Regency, Nabha State. It was held in that case that the proceedings under section 186 of the Companies Act are proceedings in a Court of civil jurisdiction. Learned counsel for the respondents contends that the jurisdiction exercised by this Court under the Companies Act is of a special nature and it is neither civil nor criminal. We are unable to agree with this. The Bar Councils Act, 1926, confers certain special powers upon this Court. The jurisdiction exercised by this Court under the Bar Councils ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers Patent for testamentary, intestate and matrimonial matters. The mere fact that the testamentary and matrimonial jurisdictions have been dealt with in the Letters Patent of this Court under separate headings and not under the heading of "Civil Jurisdiction of the Court" docs not imply that testamentary, intestate and matrimonial matters are not of a civil nature. Matrimonial disputes between Hindus and Muhammadans go in ordinary civil Courts. The Letters Patent made an exception to this general rule by providing in Clause 26 that matrimonial disputes between persons professing the Christian religion shall be dealt with by the High Court. Similar exception has been made as regards the class of civil cases relating to testamentary and intestate matters. Clauses 25 and 26 in effect provide that notwithstanding the fact that this High Court shall have no original civil jurisdiction, it will have such jurisdiction in this special types of cases of civil nature. They are really provisos to Clause 9 of the Letters Patent which provides for extraordinary original civil jurisdiction. The point under consideration is covered by authorities. The proposition that the order dated 15th Sept ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eld as exercising "ordinary original civil jurisdiction." Learned counsel for the respondents has referred to Anjuman Imdad Bahmi Qarza v. Imam Din. That was a case which arose out of an award given under the provisions of the Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, and in the course of the judgment Mahajan, J., observing that the language employed in Rule 18(h) framed under the Co-operative Societies Act was similar in terms to the language used in section 199 of the Companies Act, remarked: "I can say from experience that it has never been challenged that a payment order made under the Companies Act cannot be enforced within the outside limit of 12 years prescribed by section 48 of the Civil Procedure Code and that Article 182 of the Limitation Act is not applicable. The practice in the High Court throughout has been to apply Article 182 for the enforcement of payment order made under Companies Act." No question arose in that case as regards the precise article of the Limitation Act applicable for the execution of orders passed under the Companies Act by the High Courts. With great respect we venture to say that the above observations were obiter dicta. Reliance has also been p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... grounds of objection were taken by the judgment-debtors but the learned Civil Judge decided those points against them. Learned counsel for the respondents assails two of those findings. It is, therefore, necessary to deal with them also. The first objection of the judgment-debtors was that the Registrar of the High Court had no power to pass an order transferring the application for execution to the Court of the District Judge. Under clause ( e ) of sub-rule xi of Rule 9, Chapter I, of the Rules of this Court the Registrar has the power to "send decrees and other orders to other Courts for execution." Learned counsel for the respondents contends that this rule is ultra vires and the Court had no jurisdiction to delegate its judicial function to a ministerial official. The rules of the Court were made in 1898 and so far as we are aware this provision has been in existence since then without being ever challenged. Inter alia these rules have been framed under section 122 of the Code. Transfer of decrees for execution to other Courts is an act of ministerial nature. The Code of Civil Procedure does not require the issue of any notice to the judgment-debtor before passing an or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
