AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 147 wordsThe suit has been dismissed on the ground that the matter in question, viz., the satisfaction of the decree, is a matter which should be dealt with
by the court in execution of the decree and not by a separate suit.
It is clear that it is of this nature. The effect of Section 258 of the CPC is only to exclude proof of an uncertified agreement in execution
proceedings. It does hot limit the operation of Section 244. The case in I. L. R 5 M 397, Viraraghava v. Subbakka, is cited by the appellant''s
pleader. This case shows that an action for the breach of the contract to certify adjustment of the decree may be brought. But it is not authority for
the position that a suit to declare that a decree has been satisfied will lie. The appeal is dismissed with costs.