Skip to main content

Execution in CPC

 A civil suit basically has three stages, first stage being institution ,second stage being adjudication and third stage being execution

Execution of a civil suit

execution of decrees and orders are covered under section 36 to 74 of CPC

The term execution is not defined the CPC

But in layman‘s language execution can be said as implementation of an order or a judgement

The execution is a process of getting a degree or judgement enforced on the defendant or the judgement debtor to fulfil the order mandated by the court and also enable the degree holder to given the things granted to him or her by the judgement.

For example ,A filed a civil suit against B to claim Rs.10,000.

So,here, the court ordered in favour of A And gave the legal order to B to pay the amount.

So, here in this illustration A would be the degree holder and B would be the judgement debtor,

Suppose even after the judgement B is not willing to pay the amount to A.

A has the option to submit an application for the execution of the decree and take help of judicial process.

Section 38 of the CPC speaks that A judgement can be executed only by the court of the first instance which means the court who has passed the decree or by the court

Or to whom the degree has been sent for execution,

37 of the CPC talks about A broader definition of court and which court holds the Jurisdiction power for the execution of the decree

1 - the court which has actually passed the decree,

2- The court which has passed the appellate degree,

3 - The court who has passed the decree but now is not in existence, so ,the decree would be executed by the court which has the jurisdiction to execute it,

4- The court who has ordered the decree but does not has the jurisdiction to execute in this case the decree would be sent to the court with jurisdiction.
It has been rightfully laid down that the execution power or say responsibility lies with the court who has passed the decree or order but there are certain unforeseen circumstances that rise and the execution of the decree is passed or transferred to another court. It can be transferred under two conditions.

- Suo motu - own condition 

- If a party submits an application for the same

It is not compulsory that the execution of decree is transferred to another court by the application of a party it depends on the discretion of the court.

 Grounds under which the execution of decree can be transferred to another court:

- If the judgement debtor resides within a certain jurisdiction or has business in that jurisdiction.
-If the judgement debtor’s property does not fall within the jurisdiction of the court of first instance
-If the decree directs delivery of such property which is outside the jurisdiction of the first instance court


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree