Satya Narayan Sharma @APPELLANT@Hash Rajendra Dasora

This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against the order dated 23.05.2018 passed by the Executing Court, wherein the

application filed by the petitioner seeking dismissal of the execution proceedings has been rejected.

In a pre-litigation case before the Lok Adalat, a compromise was arrived at between the parties on 20.07.2015, wherein the petitioner was required to

pay a sum of Rs.2,27,000/- by 11.09.2015. When the execution proceedings were initiated by the decree-holder, reply was filed by the petitioner inter-

alia indicating that on 15.09.2015, he gave a cheque of Rs.1,42,000/- to the decree-holder, which cheque was deposited in the account of counsel for

the decree-holder; thereafter, a sum of Rs.45,000/was paid in cash to the decree-holder and a blank cheque was also given regarding the balance

amount. When the decree-holder and the counsel refused to give receipt of Rs.45,000/- and Rs.1,42,000/- and filled a sum of Rs.80,000/- towards the

due amount of the decree in the blank cheque, the payment of the cheque was stopped by the petitioner.Â

Based on the submissions, it was submitted before the Executing Court that as the petitioner has already paid a sum of Rs.1,87,000/-, he was prepared

to deposit Rs.40,000/- and therefore, the proceedings initiated for execution of the decree be dropped.

Reply to the application was filed contesting the averments made in the application.

The Executing Court after hearing the parties came to the conclusion that the submissions made by the petitioner regarding making payment of

Rs.1,42,000/- in the account of the counsel and Rs.45,000/- having been paid in cash cannot be taken as satisfaction of the decree and if that amount

has wrongly been taken by the counsel, he could take proceedings against the counsel and consequently, rejected the application.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the Executing Court was not justified in dismissing the application filed by the petitioner. It was

submitted that there was no occasion for the petitioner to make any payment of a huge sum of Rs.1,42,000/- to the counsel for the decree-holder.

Admittedly, the amount has been deposited in the account of the counsel for the decree-holder, who is related to the decree-holder and therefore,

the said amount could not have been ordered to be recovered again from the petitioner. Further submissions have been made that amount of

Rs.45,000/- was also paid in cash though no receipt was taken / is available and the said amount also cannot be required to be paid to the decree-

holder. It is reiterated that as only a sum of Rs.40,000/- is outstanding, the petitioner is prepared to pay the said amount, as such, the order impugned

deserves to be set-aside.

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the material available on record.

The plea, which is sought to be taken regarding the amount of cheque though delivered to the decree-holder, having been deposited in the bank

account of the counsel for the decree-holder and that a sum of Rs.45,000/- having been paid in cash to the decree-holder, cannot without any proof

regarding the plea sought to be raised by the petitioner be taken as payment having been made in satisfaction of the decree. The application filed by

the petitioner, seeking dismissal of the application on the said count itself was misplaced as in absence of any proof regarding payment of the amount

of decree to the decree-holder himself, same could not have been taken as satisfaction of the decree.

In view thereof, it cannot be said that the Executing Court committed any error in dismissing the application filed by the petitioner. There is no

substance in the revision petition, the same is, therefore, dismissed.