SOBHA SINGH AND SONS PVT. LTD. versus SHASHI MOHAN KAPUR (DECEASED) THR. L.R.

Citation: [2019] 9 S.C.R. 949 · Decided: 15-07-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
949
 SOBHA SINGH AND SONS PVT. LTD.
v.
SHASHI MOHAN KAPUR (DECEASED) THR. L.R.
(Civil Appeal No.5534 of 2019)
JULY 15, 2019
[ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE AND
DINESH MAHESHWARI, JJ.]
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Or. XX, rr. 6, 6A & 7, Or. 21,
rr.2, 11(2) & (3) and Or. XXIII, r.3 and ss. 35-A, 151 – Appellant-
landlord is the decree holder and the respondent is the judgment
debtor – Appellant let out the suit house to the father of the original
respondent – Appellant filed suit in 2009 against the respondent
inter alia for his eviction from the suit house – Respondent
compromised the matter– Suit disposed of in terms of the said
compromise– Respondent filed application for extension of time to
vacate the suit house – Allowed– Respondent filed another
application seeking further time to vacate the suit house – Dismissed
– Respondent failed to vacate the suit house – Appellant filed
Execution Petition for execution of the consent order dated
01.06.2012 for obtaining vacant possession of the suit house –
Judgment debtor died leaving behind the present respondent as legal
representative of the original tenant – Respondent filed four
applications challenging the executability of the consent order as
being null and void – Dismissed by the Executing Court imposing
cost of Rs.5 lakhs – First appeal filed by the Respondent – Allowed
by the High Court – Held: High Court was not right in holding that
in the absence of a formal decree not being drawn or/and filed, the
appellant had no right to file the Execution petition on the strength
of the consent order dated. 01.06.2012 – Principle in r.6A (2) of
Or.XX dealing with the filing of the appeal without enclosing the
copy of the decree along with the judgment and providing the
consequence of not drawing up the decree, can be made applicable
also to filing of the execution application u/Or.XXI, r.2 – It is not
necessary to file copy of the decree along with execution application
unless the Court directs the decree holder to file certified copy of
the decree – Thus, even though the appellant did not file the certified
[2019]  9 S.C.R. 949
  949
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
950
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 9 S.C.R.
copy of the decree along with the execution application for the
reason that the same was not passed by the Court, yet the execution
application filed by the appellant was maintainable –Further, all
the objections raised by the respondent were frivolous and were
raised only with a view to avoid execution of the compromise decree
– Respondent took time twice to vacate the suit house and yet did
not adhere to the undertaking given –Such conduct cannot be
countenanced and is reprehensible– Executing Court was right in
rejecting the objections raised by the respondent in his applications
– No ground to interfere in the findings of the Executing Court –
However, cost of Rs.5 Lakhs is excessive – Respondent to pay
compensatory cost of Rs.50,000/- to the appellant– Further
directions issued – Decree.
Words & Expressions – “and shall pass a decree in
accordance therewith” – Meaning of – Discussed – Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 – Or. XXIII, r.3.
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Or.XX, r.6A(2) – Non-filing
of the certified copy of the decree, as the decree was not passed by
the Court, along with the execution application – Effect of – Held:
Notwithstanding the fact that the decree was not passed, yet by
virtue of principle underlined in Or.XX, r.6A(2), the consent order
dated 01.06.2012 had the effect of a decree till the date of actual
passing of the decree by the Court for the purposes of execution or
for any other purpose.
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – s.152 – Conditions for
invoking power under – Discussed.
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – s.151 r/w Or.XX, r.6A – Held:
In the present case, the Court which disposed of the suit, did not
draw the decree but only passed the consent order – In such a case,
the decree holder was required to file application u/s.151 r/w Or.XX,
r.6A to the Court for drawing a decree in accordance with the
consent order dated. 01.06.2012.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 The High Court was not right in holding that in
the absence of a formal decree not being drawn or/and filed, the
appellant (decree holder) had no right to file the Execution
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
951
petition on the strength of the consent order dated 01.06.2012.
This finding of the High Court is not legally sustainable.
[Para 24] [960-D]
1.2 Order 20 Rule 6 of the Code deals with contents

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.