Hem Raj Bansal vs State Bank of India

J.V. Gupta, J.—This petition is directed against the order of the executing Court dated 4th June, 1988 whereby the objection petition filed on behalf of the petitioners was dismissed.

In the suit filed by the bank/decree-holder for the recovery of Rs.6,60,866.26 against M/s.Barnala Conduit Pipe Works, the bank moved an application under Order 38 Rule 5, Code of Civil Procedure, for attachment of the decree obtained by the judgment-debtor against M/s Amrit Lal Gupta and others. According to the petitioner, a sum of Rs.2,75,038/- was paid to the decree holder i.e. M/s Barnala Conduit Pipe Works and others whereas the balance amount of Rs. 1,99,962/- has been paid to the bank as per directions of this Court vide order dated 5th August, 1988. According to the learned counsel, the amount which is already paid to the decree-holder should not be directed to be paid again to the bank by the petitioners. The said amount was paid to the decree-holder under Court''s orders and, therefore, the petitioners were not liable to pay it to the decree-holder for the second time.

Since the impugned order does not contain the relevant facts and the contentions raised by the petitioner/objectors in their objections nor was any such issue framed by the executing Court, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. The executing Court shall frame the necessary issue arising out of the pleadings of the parties and after allowing the parties to lead evidence, if any, decide the matter afresh. The petition is disposed of accordingly.

The parties, through counsel, are directed to appear in the executing Court on 31st August, 1989.