2020 PLP 24 (CLCN)

ALI BAIG, J.

This civil revision petition under section 115, C.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner/decree-holder against the impugned judgment/order dated 16-8-2018 passed by the learned Civil Judge 1st Class/Executing Court Hunza in execution petition No.01/2011, whereby the learned Civil Judge 1st Class/Executing Court Hunza has rejected the objections filed by the present petitioner against the report of Manager National Bank of Pakistan Ali Abad Hunza Branch dated 13-4-2018 regarding details of profit 22% on the decretal amount amounting to Rs.131,200/- since 06-7-1999 to 01-4-2018.

2. Brief facts leading to filing of this civil revision petition are that the present petitioner/decree-holder had filed a suit for recovery of an amount amounting to Rs.211,200/- with interest on 06-7-1999 on the basis of an agreement dated 18-9-1998 against the present respondent/judgment debtor. During pendency of suit a preliminary decree to the extent of Rs.80,000/- was passed by the learned trial court in favour of the present petitioner/decree-holder and the aforesaid decretal amount amounting to Rs.80,000/- was received by the petitioner/decree-holder from the respondent/judgment-debtor. After deduction of aforesaid amount the suit for recovery of Rs.131,200/- was sub judice before the learned trial court which was ex-parte decreed in favour of the present petitioner/decree- holder by the learned trial court vide judgment/decree dated 07-7-2005 and decree-sheet was prepared on 26-2-2011. Thereafter, the present petitioner/decree-holder filed an execution petition in the learned Executing Court and present respondent/ judgment-debtor filed objection petition in the trial/Executing Court, which was dismissed up-to the Hon'ble Supreme Appellate Court Gilgit Baltistan and execution petition was remanded back to the learned Executing Court for execution of decree passed in favour of the present petitioner.

3. On 17-11-2017, the learned Executing Court had directed the judgment-debtor/respondent to deposit the principal decretal amount amounting to Rs.131,200/- in the court and Manager National Bank of Pakistan Hunza Branch was directed to calculate 22% profit from 06-7-1999 to 01-4-2018 on the decretal amount. The judgment-debtor/ present respondent had challenged the aforesaid order of the learned Executing Court in the court of learned District Judge Hunza who had dismissed the appeal of the present judgment-debtor/respondent vide judgment/order dated 28-11-2017 which was also challenged in this court through civil revision petition which was dismissed by this court vide judgment dated 09-3-2018.

4. In response to direction of learned Executing Court dated 17-11-2017 the Manager National Bank of Pakistan Hunza Branch vide his letter No.ABD/Civil/2018 dated 13-4-2018 has furnished details of profit 22% on the decretal amount amounting to Rs.131,200/- in the learned Executing Court and profit on the decretal amount from 06-7-1999 to 01-4-2018 has been determined/calculated as Rs.540,903/-.

5. The present petitioner/decree-holder feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the report of Manager National Bank of Pakistan Hunza Ali Abad Branch had filed objections in the Executing Court Hunza, which were dismissed by the learned Executing Court vide the impugned judgment/order dated 15-8-2018, hence this revision petition.

6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner/ decree-holder contended that the impugned judgment/order dated 15-8-2018 passed by the learned Executing Court is contrary to law and facts on the record of the case, as such the impugned judgment/order passed by the learned trial court is not maintainable and liable to be set aside. The learned counsel for the petitioner/decree-holder further argued that the learned Executing Court wrongly directed the Manager National Bank of Pakistan Ali Abad Hunza Branch for furnishing details of 22% profit on the decretal amount amounting to Rs.131,200/- and the Manager National Bank of Pakistan Ali Abad Hunza Branch has submitted wrong details of 22% profit to the Executing Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner/decree-holder further submitted that the learned trial court has failed to apply its judicious mind while passing the impugned judgment/order and has erred while dismissing the objections of the present petitioner/decree-holder. Concluding his arguments the learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the learned Executing Court has travelled beyond its jurisdiction while passing the impugned judgment/order, thus the impugned judgment/ order passed by the learned Executing Court may be set aside by accepting this revision petition.

7. Conversely, the learned counsel for the respondent/judgment debtor controverted the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and supported the impugned judgment/order passed by the learned trial court/Executing Court by contending that on the consent and request of petitioner/decree-holder, the learned Executing Court had directed the Manager National Bank of Pakistan Ali Abad Hunza Branch for furnishing of details of 22% profit on the decretal amount amounting to Rs.131,200/- from 06-7-1999 to 01-4-2018 and the present respondent/judgment-debtor had challenged the aforesaid order of the learned Executing Court through civil revision petition in this court, and the said revision petition was contested by the present petitioner before this court, which was ultimately dismissed by this court vide judgment dated 09-3-2018, hence the petitioner is estopped by his conduct and admission to challenge the aforesaid impugned order of the learned Executing Court. The learned counsel for the respondent/judgment-debtor further argued that the learned trial court vide judgment/decree dated 07-07-2005, has passed an ex-parte decree for payment of Rs.131,200/- with profit from institution of suit till execution of decree and the manager NBP Ali Abad Hunza has rightly assessed/calculated 22% profit on the aforesaid decretal amount as the learned Executing Court is bound to execute the decree as it is.

8. We have patiently heard the lengthy arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance.

9. Perusal of record shows that the present petitioner/decree-holder had filed a suit for recovery of an amount amounting Rs.211,200/- with interest on 06-7-1999, on the basis of an agreement dated 18-9-1998, against the present respondent/judgment-debtor. During pendency of suit a preliminarily decree to the extent of 80,000/- was passed by the learned trial court in favour of present petitioner/decree-holder and the said decretal amount was received by the present petitioner/decree-holder. Later on after recording ex-parte evidence of the present petitioner, the learned executing/trial court has passed an ex-parte decree for payment of Rs.131,200/- with profit in favour of the petitioner vide decree/judgment dated 07-7-2005.

10. For ease and convenience, we would like to re-produce contents of order-sheet as under-- Therefore, an ex-parte decree for payment of Rs.131200/- with profit from institution of suit till execution of decree is granted in favour of plaintiff against defendant. Defendant to bear the costs. File be consigned to record after completion. Announced 07-7-2005. Sd/xxx Civil Judge 1st Class Hunza Camp Gilgit. Main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner/decree -holder is that he is entitled to get 22% compound interest on the decretal amount instead of 22% flat profit and the Manager NBP Ali Abad Hunza branch has not calculated 22% compound interest on the decretal amount.

11. From bare perusal of above re-produced contents of decree-sheet prepared/passed by the learned Executing/ Trial Court, it reveals that, the learned trial court has not granted compound interest on the decretal amount i.e. 131,200/- rather profit on the decretal amount from institution of suit till execution of decree has been granted. Moreover, the learned trial/Executing Court on 17-11-2017 has asked the Manager NBP Ali Abad Hunza Branch for calculation of 22% profit on decretal amount in presence and consent of the petitioner/decree -holder directing the Manager NBP Ali Abad Hunza Branch for calculation of 22% profit. The petitioner/decree-holder has failed to challenge the afore-said order of the executing court before any higher judicial forum, thus, order dated 17-11-2017, has attained finality.

12. It is well-settled principle of law that an Executing Court cannot go beyond the decree and an Executing Court is bound to execute the decree as it is. Thus, we are of the firmed opinion that, the learned Executing Court has followed this principle while passing the impugned order/judgment. In this connection, reliance is placed on the following case laws/reported judgments of superior courts-- 1999 SCMR 22, (2) 2015 CLC 89, (3) 2006 YLR 3074.

13. Furthermore, the learned counsel for the petitioner has been unable to point out any illegality or material irregularity having been committed by the learned Executing Court while passing the impugned order/judgment warranting interference of this court by invoking its revisional jurisdiction.

14. In view of above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that, this revision petition is bereft of substance and the same is dismissed with no order as to costs.

15. Before parting with this judgment it is observed that the judgment-debtor/respondent has reportedly deposited the amount of profit as calculated by the Manager NBP Ali Abad Hunza Branch amounting to Rs.540,903/- in the Executing Court and the learned Executing Court Hunza is directed to pay the aforesaid amount to the petitioner/decree-holder forthwith. File. ZC/123/GB Revision dismissed.