The appeal preferred by the State of Rajasthan against the aforesaid judgment and decree was allowed ex parte by the High Court.
on Rs.37,593/ from 17.10.1992 till date.
An appeal was preferred by the State of Rajasthan on 12.2.1980, an application under Section 144 C.P.C. was moved on behalf of the State on 2.4.1981 and Smt.
Dhanwanti Devi had purchased House No.80B Block Sri Ganganagar from the State of Rajasthan on 7.7.1947 and that except Smt.
As against the said amount, two securities were furnished, one by Shri Gurbachan Singh for Rs.2927.57 and another by Smt.
Dhanwanti Devi had executed the Will in order to escape from her liability to the suit claim.
2 of 1989 on 21.11.1992 on the application of the State.
The State of Rajasthan filed reply to the application under Order 21 Rule 58 C.P.C. It was asserted that Smt.
Dhanwanti Devi was number a party to the suit at any point of time.
The Additional District and Sessions Judge dismissed the application under Order 21 Rule 58 C.P.C. filed by the appellant herein.
Recovery against number applicant No.2 be made up to the extent of Rs.35,592.57 as per the security while the action for the recovery for the interest amount of Rs.37,592.57 Rs.1.1/2 per hundred per month that would be worked out from the date of filing the application dated 21.4.1981 will be taken against number applicant No.1.
It was further alleged that the appellant Ashutosh had become the exclusive owner of the house pursuant to the Will executed by Smt.
a A decree cannot be executed against a partner when the decree was against the partnership firm b A decree cannot be executed in violation of Order 21 Rules 49 and 50 C.P.C. Learned companynsel appearing for the appellant submitted that Smt.
Now the parties are in this Court.
Both the parties are in the legal battlefield for all these years.
It is number in dispute that the decree was passed against the firm in which Smt.
The starting point for the litigation is the decree dated 6.6.1970 passed against the State of Rajasthan in respect of the companystruction work of irrigation department.
The dispute between the parties is only with reference to the interest on the principal amount of Rs.37,593/ as on 17.10.1992, which according to the State, was payable by the Firm.
80B Block Sri Ganganagar be released in his favour as the same can number be attached in execution.
Aggrieved by the said judgment and order dated 12.11.2003, the appellant preferred the above appeal.
Kamla Devi and Shri Gurbachan Singh as respondents to the said proceedings.
It is number in dispute that the decree amount of Rs.37,593/ was received by the State on 17.10.1992.
She executed a Will dated 7.12.1983 bequeathing the aforesaid house in favour of her daughters son Ashutosh.
80B Block Sri Ganganagar.
It is stated that the probate proceedings are pending in respect of the aforesaid Will.
The said companypany filed execution and recovered Rs.37,592.57.
It was reiterated that the aforesaid house exclusively belonged to Smt.
The State of Rajasthan impleaded Sharma Co., Smt.
Kamla Devi and that the applicant State was entitled to interest from Sharma Co. and that the aforesaid application was maintainable under Sections 144 145 C.P.C. The Court while allowing the said application held as follows On the basis of the above discussions, we reach to the companyclusion that this application is maintainable under Sections 144, 145 C.P.C. against the number applicant Nos.
2 of 1998 under Order 21 Rule 58 read with Section 96 C.P.C. The High Court of Rajasthan dismissed the first appeal filed by the appellant.
Ultimately, the District Judge dismissed the application filed under Order 21 Rules 49 and 50 C.P.C. and the Review Application was also dismissed on 5.9.1998.
Lakshmanan, J. Leave granted.
Dhanwanti Devi died in May, 1985.
The High Court held that the Will was prepared to defraud the creditor and number with an intention to bonafidely bequeath the property to the appellant, daughters son.
The Review Application filed by the appellant was also dismissed.
It was also stated that Smt.
The attachment order in respect of House No.80B Block Sri Ganganagar was passed by the District Judge in Execution Case No.
Several other proceedings were taken thereafter by both the parties opposing attachment and the execution etc.
Thereupon the appellant filed S.B. Civil Execution First Appeal No.2 of 1998 and the said appeal was dismissed on 12.11.2003.
Arising out of S.L.P. Civil No.4120 OF 2004 Dr. AR.
Being aggrieved, the appellant filed S.B. Civil Execution First appeal No.
The appellant has also succeeded before the trial Court.
2 of 1998 whereby the appeal preferred by the appellant was dismissed.
The District Judge, Sri Ganganagar allowed the application filed by the State of Rajasthan under Section 144 C.P.C. and held that the action can be taken against Smt.
61,890/ was arrived at as interest on Rs.37,593/ as on 17.10.1992.
The appeal is preferred against the judgment and final order dated 12.11.2003 passed by the High Court of Rajasthan in S.B. Civil Execution First Appeal No.
In May, 1987, the District Judge, Sri Ganganagar allowed the application filed by the State of Rajasthan under Section 144 C.P.C. The attachment of the property was made of the house in question on 21.11.1992.
1 and 2 and the applicant is fully entitled to get the action taken.
It was also held that Smt.
Along with the aforesaid surety bonds, House No.79B Block Sri Ganganagar was also furnished against security.
We shall number advert to the submissions made by the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondent State.
Both the companytentions raised by the learned companynsel appearing for the appellant have absolutely numbermerit.
Though the argument of Mr. Aruneshwar Gupta appears to be attractive on the first blush, yet on a reconsideration and re appreciation of the same, the said submission has numbermerits.
Dhanwanti Devi and she had bequeathed the same in favour of the appellant Ashutosh on 7.12.1983 and that Smt.
Dhanwanti Devi, the wife of Shri Shiv Lal Sharma was the exclusive owner of House bearing No.
The unsuccessful appellant in S.B. Civil Execution First Appeal No.2 of 1998 before the High Court of Rajasthan is the appellant before us by special leave.
Kamla for Rs.37,592.57.
Briefly stated, the facts are that a decree for Rs.37,255.07 was passed against the State of Rajasthan on 6.6.1970 in respect of the companystruction work of irrigation department under Arbitration Act in case No.4 of 1969 entitled Sharma Co. vs. State of Rajasthan.
It was prayed that House No.
Case No.2 of 1981.
Dhanwanti Devi executed a Will on 7.12.1983 and died in the month of May, 1985.
Dhanwanti Devi was the partner of the aforesaid firm to the extent of 12 paise and she was liable for payment of suit liability.
An application under Section 144 C.P.C. was moved on behalf of the State which was registered as Civil Misc.
