Kanji Dhermsi and Company v Rajsi (Civil Case No. 242 of 1921)

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

Holding

Held that Article 179 of the Indian Limitation Act 1877 applies to execution proceedings in the Supreme Court of the Colony and Protectorate because the Court is not established by Royal Charter. Where a judgment-creditor made no application for execution between July 1922 and November 1926 despite an order for monthly payments, the application for execution of the balance was barred by Article 179.

Outcome

Application for execution of decree dismissed as barred by limitation

Facts

On 15 December 1921, Pickering J ordered the debtor to pay Rs. 50 (Sh. 100) on the 15th of each month in execution proceedings, with liberty to apply and a committal order to issue on default. The last payment was made in July 1922. No application was made by the judgment-creditor to the Court between July 1922 and 30 November 1926. The judgment-creditor then applied for execution of the decree in respect of the unpaid balance.

Issues

1. Whether Article 179 or Article 180 of the Indian Limitation Act 1877 applies to execution proceedings in the Supreme Court of this Colony and Protectorate.
2. Whether the application for execution of the decree was barred by limitation where no application was made between July 1922 and November 1926.

Orders

• Application dismissed with costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (2)

• Indian Limitation Act 1877 Article 179
• Indian Limitation Act 1877 Article 180

Cases cited (2)

• Anderson v Thakur Dass (Supreme Court No. 202 of 1920)
• Keshiram v. Pandu. I.L.R. 27, Born. 1. at the bottom of p. 9

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.