AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
From the reported cases Sabhanatha v. Lakshmi ILR 7 Mad. 80, Yusuf v. Sirdar ILR 7 Mad. 83 it appears to us that what has to be determined is whether the sum is payable by an ascertained
date. This is a question purely of construction. Although a decree may not in express terms fix a specified date, yet if it can be gathered from the decree as a whole that payment is directed to be
made on dates or at periods which are sufficiently indicated by the terms of the decree, the requirements of Article 179,
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
[Article 179:
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Description of application. | Period of | Time from which period begins
| limitation. | to run.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
For the execution of a decree or | Three years; | 1. The date of the decree or order, or
order of any Civil Court not pro- | or where a certi | 2. (where there has been an appeal)
vided for by No. 180 or by the | fied copy of the | the date of the final decree or order of
Code of Civil Procedure, Section | decree or order | the Appellate Court, or
| has been regis- | 3. (where there has been a review
| tered, six years. | or judgment) the date of limitation
| | passed on the review, or
| | 4. (where the application next here-
| | in after mentioned has boon made) the
| | date of applying in accordance with law
| | to the proper Court for execution or to
| | take some step in and of execution, of
| | the decree or order, or
| | 5. (where the notice next herein-
| | after mentioned has been issued) the
| | date of issuing a notice under the Code
| | of Civil Procedure, Section 268, or
| | 6. (where the application is to enforce
| | any payment which the decree or order
| | directs to be made at a specified date)
| | the date so specified.
| | Explanation I.--Where the decree
| | or order has been passed severally in
| | favour of more persons than one, dis-
| | tinguishing portions of the subject-
| | matter as payable or deliverable to each
| | the application mentioned in Clause 4
| | of this number shall take effect in fa-
| | vour only of such of the said persons
| | or their representatives as it may be
| | made by. But when the decree or or-
| | der has been passed jointly in favour
| | of more persons than one, such appli-
| | cation, if made by any one or more of
| | them or by his or their representatives,
| | shall take effect in favour of them all.
| | Where the decree or order has been
| | passed severally against more persons
| | than one, distinguishing portions of the
| | subject-matter as payable or deliverable
| | by each the application shall take effect
| | against only such of the said persons
| | or their representatives as it may be
| | made against.
| | But where the decree or order has been
| | passed jointly against more persons
| | than one, the application, if made
| | against any one or more of them, or
| | against his or their representatives shall
| | take effect against them all.
| | Explanation II.--""Proper Court
| | means the Court whose duty it is (wheth-
| | er u/s 226 or 227 of the
| | CPC or otherwise)
| | to execute the decree or order.]
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Clause 6 of the schedule to the Limitation Act are satisfied.
In this view we see no ground for admitting the appeal and we accordingly reject it.