Case Details

Citation(s)
1991 SLG 1697 1991 SLD 1697 1991 CLC 424
Sindh High Court
Suit No. 6 of 1986 and Execution Application No. 73 of 1988,decided on 31st May, 1990. dates of hearing: 31st December,1989; 2nd and 3rd January, 1990
WAJIHUDDIN AHMED, J
Iqbal Kazi for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondent

Messrs STATE ASSOCIATESvsMessrs FARBEN INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT

Law:

Section:

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 60 & OXXI, R.46---Debt---Concept---Debt as envisaged in S.60 and OXXI, R.46, C.P.C. is the equivalent of existing obligation to pay whether immediately or in future. Concept of debt in section 60 and Order 21, rule 46, C.P.C. signifies a specified sum of money, which was payable, in praesenti or in futuro, on the basis of a subsisting obligation, which had become fixed. To put it differently, the sum involved would either be payable on demand or in future but, in each case, it should have become due for payment. Thus, a debt was the equivalent of an existing obligation to pay, whether immediately or in future. The liability, however, must be an existing, a perfected and an absolute one. Brij Kumar v. Naurangi Lal A I R 1938 Lah. 336; Gajraj Sheo Karandas v. Sir Hukamchand Sarupchand and another A I R 1939 Born. 90; Mela Ram v. Firm Ram Das Joshi & Sons A I R 1942 Lah. 275 and Sadiqeen Traders v. S.M. Alam 1980 C L E 1851 ref. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 60 & OXXI, R.46---Debt when amenable to attachment---Debt due to -debtors from bank, being actual, existing, perfected and absolute was aptly amenable to attachment. Muhammad Iqbal v. Additional Settlement Commissioner P L D. 1971 SC 318 ref. (c) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 60 & OXXI, Rr.22 & 46---Execution of decree against garnishees---Notice of execution to garnishees would be essential. Where the decree was sought to be executed merely against the two garnishees and not against the -debtors directly, notice of execution to the garnishees was essential as, on the language of Order 21, Rule 22, C.P.C. it was only in respect of parties to a decree that notice of execution might not go, where execution was filed within one year of the date of decree. It needs also to be clarified that Order 21, Rule 22, C.P.C. conceives of mandatory notices in the three distinct situations contemplated in that provision and did not foreclose other situations where, on principle or discretion, notice ought to be addressed. Apropos the second explanation namely, that of a practice of not sending a copy of the execution application…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492