9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (8) TMI 688X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at no amount has been received towards the satisfaction of the decree under execution. The appeal filed against the decree under execution has been dismissed by the Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore. The decree is sought to be executed by issuance of warrants of attachment against the movable and immovable properties of the judgment debtor situated in India as per details given in Annexure-'A'. The decree holder has disclosed that it is also seeking execution of the decree in Canada where the judgment debtor has assets. The judgment debtor has also raised objections to the execution petition filed in the court of Canada. 3. The judgment debtor has raised three objections to the maintainability of the execution petition namely (1) The execution petition is not maintainable; (2) The Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the execution petition; and (3) The execution petition is an abuse of the process of the Court. 4. Maintainability An application for execution of a foreign decree, it is submitted, by the judgment debtor, can be filed under Section 44A of the CPC before a District Court and not before the High Court where the decree holder has presented i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reliance on Janardhan Mohandas Rajan Pillai and Anr. v. Madhubhai Patel and Ors. AIR 2003 Bom 490; Bank of India v. Harshadrai Odhavji AIR 2002 Bom 449 ; Bakshi Lochan Singh and Ors. v. Jathedar Santokh Singh and Ors. AIR 1971 Delhi 277 and R.P. Sachdeva (deceased by L.R.) and Ors. v. The State AIR 1986 Delhi 178. 7. I have carefully gone through the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of M.B.A.L. Quamar (supra). I am unable to comprehend how this judgment can be of any assistance to the judgment debtor. The question before the Supreme Court in that case was not at all akin to the question before this Court. The foreign decree in that case was brought to the High Court of Andhra Pradesh for execution. It was found that the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in its admiralty jurisdiction could entertain the execution petition in respect of a foreign judgment which was passed by the High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division Admiralty Court of England. The question before this Court is whether in view of there being two courts of original civil jurisdiction namely the District Judge and the High Court for different pecuniary values the High Court can be the 'District Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Civil Court of original jurisdiction irrespective of the valuation of the suit as in the case of what are called the Presidency High Courts. Reference in this connection may be made to AIR 1955 Bom 55 in re: Fazlehussein Haiderbhoy Busamusa v. Yusufally Adamji where it has been held that the Bombay High Court in the City of Bombay is the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction. The original jurisdiction of this High Court is in every suit the value of which exceeds fifty thousand rupees and Therefore, this High Court is the principal Court of original civil jurisdiction in every such suit. A part of the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of the Court of the District Judge, Delhi has been conferred upon this High Court and, Therefore, with respect to such part, this High Court will be the principal Court of ordinary original civil jurisdiction notwithstanding Section 24 of the Punjab Courts Act. We, Therefore, agree with the learned Single Judge that for the purpose of this suit the value of which exceeds fifty thousand rupees, this High Court is the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction as contemplated by Section 92 of the Code of Civil procedure. 8. This judgm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing contained in any law for the time being in force and that can be done only by saying that for purposes of Section 92 of the Civil P.C. the Court of District Judge, Delhi will be the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction in every suit the value of which does not exceed fifty thousand rupees but in other suits the value of which exceeds fifty thousand rupees, this High Court will be the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction. It cannot be disputed that if original jurisdiction had been completely taken away from the Court of the District Judge, Delhi, and conferred upon this High Court, then notwithstanding Section 24 of the Punjab Courts Act, this High Court will be the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction irrespective of the valuation of the suit as in the case of what are called the Presidency High Courts. Reference in this connection may be made to AIR 1955 Bom 55 in re: Fazlehussein Haiderbhoy Buxamusa v. Yusufally Adamji, where it has been held that the Bombay High Court in the city of Bombay is the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction. The original jurisdiction of this High Court is in every suit the value of which exceeds fifty thousan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssels involved in collision was an Indian vessel. The owners of both these vessels were also foreigners. Only one of the managers of the two ships was an Indian company. The management had come into the hands of the Indian company subsequent to the collision. The Supreme Court held that the High Court of Bombay did not have any jurisdiction in handling the admiralty suit. The scheme of Section 44A of the CPC is entirely different. It makes no mention of jurisdiction to try. Only thing necessary is that the decree has been obtained from any superior court of any reciprocating territory. The decree holder is required to file a certified copy of the decree along with a certificate from such superior court stating the extent, if any, to which the decree has been satisfied. There is no requirement under Section 44A of the CPC that the District Court in which the foreign decree is presented for execution should be also a court which could have entertained the suit. The decree has to be executed in India as if it had been passed by the District Court in India. Since there is no requirement that the District Court to whom the decree is presented for execution should also have the jurisdict ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ind no merit in the submission that this Court has no territorial jurisdiction in entertaining the execution petition of the decree holder. 12. Abuse of the process of the Court Coming to the last objection regarding the abuse of the process of the Court, it is submitted that the decree holder has already proceeded against the judgment debtor in the Court in Ontario and, Therefore, proceeding against the judgment debtor in the High Court of Delhi is an abuse of the process of the Court. It is contended that the judgment debtor will be harassed if he has to simultaneously face execution proceedings in ten different countries and that this certainly was not the object of Section 44A of the Code. It is further contended that the decree holder obtained an interim relief from the superior court of Ontario on 20.1.2005 freezing the proceeds from the sale of M and M Engineering and thereafter on 28.1.2005 the decree holder and the judgment debtor entered into a settlement which was approved of by the court of Canada on 22.2.2005. According to the judgment debtor the decree holder having already obtained the interim relief and having entered into a settlement, cannot now approach thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re fact that the judgment debtor has offered some security is not the same as realisation of any amount under the decree. It is pertinent to mention here that the settlement does not prevent the decree holder from proceeding an execution in any other court. 15. The Court should see that the decrees passed are actually translated into amounts realised. The duty of the Court is not over by merely passing a decree. Therefore, execution proceedings should get as much attention of the court as the suits do. In Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co. Ltd. v. CEC Ltd. and Anr. 1996 2 AD (Delhi) 517 this Court specifically said that there is no provision in the Civil Procedure Code which prevents simultaneous execution of a decree by two courts. While coming to this conclusion, the Court examined various previous judgments on the question and took support from the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Prem Lata Agarawal v. Lakshman Prasad Gupta and Ors. [1971] 1 SCR364 . 16. Last point left to be mentioned is the requirement of a certificate from the Court passing the decree stating the amount recovered, if any. Section 44A of the CPC says that a certificate from the Court pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
