Certo Is this judgment real?
Beta, Supreme Court only. We check Supreme Court of India judgments only for now: a High Court citation reads "Not in our corpus", which never means it does not exist.

Supreme Court of India

RAM BACHAN RAI AND ORS. versus RAM UDAR RAI AND ORS.

Decided
18 January 2006
Judges listed
ARIJIT PASAYAT (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)
Disposal
Matter referred to larger bench

Citations

Official
[2006] 1 S.C.R. 455 · 2006 INSC 33

Cited by

We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.

Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.

The Court's text

Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.

ARIJIT PASA Y AT, J. The High Court of Patna dismissed the Civil Revision filed by the appellant summarily. Challenge in the Civil Revision was to the order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, VII, Patna, execution proceedings. By the said order Subordinate Judge held that the plea raised by the appellant about the execution petition being barred by time in terms of Article 136 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (in short the 'Limitation Act') was untenable.

p. 456, margin A

Learned Subordinate Judge held that the period of limitation starts running not from the date of decree, but when the decree becomes enforceable i.e. when it is signed.

p. 456, margin C

In support of the appeal strong reliance was placed on several decisions of this Court i.e. W.B. Essential Commodities Supply Corpn. v. Swadesh Agro Farming & Storage Pvt. Ltd. and Anr., (1999] 8 SCC 315 Hameed Joharan (Dead) and Ors. v. Abdul Salam (Dead) by lrs. and Ors., (200 I] sec 573.

p. 456, margin D

In Hameed Joharan 's case (supra) it was held after referring to the meaning to the word 'enforce' from various dictionaries words 'when the decree or order becomes enforceable' should be read in literal sense and per intention of the legislators 12 years period is to be reckoned from the date the decree became enforceable i.e. the date of the decree or order .

p. 456, margin E

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the correct position of law is expressed in Shankar Ba/ant lokhande (Dead) by lRs. Chandrakunt S. Lokhande & Anr, [1995] 3 SCC 413 and in other two cases the correct principles in law were not kept in view. We find that there is some area of conflict amongst several two-judge Bench decisions. It is also to noticed that noticing the conflict between these judgments, reference has been made to a three-Judge Bench in Chiranji Lal (dead) by lrs. v. Hari Das (dead) by Lrs .. f2005] 2 SCC 261.

p. 456, margin F

This case may also be placed before Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders to be placed alongwith Chiranji Lal 's case (supra). R.P. Appeal referred to three Judge bench.

p. 456, margin G