M. P. SHREEVASTAVA versus MRS. VEENA

M. P. SHREEVASTAVA versus MRS. VEENA

An application by the judgment-debtor for recording satisfaction of a decree for restitution of conjugal rights is maintainable under Section 47 CPC, even where the decree-holder has not applied for execution. Order 21 Rule 2 does not apply absent consent for adjustment between the parties.

Parties
Appellant: M. P. Shreevastava; Respondent: Mrs. Veena
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
24 August 1966
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Punjab High Court Letters Patent Appeal No. 96 D of 1964
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Execution of Decrees, Restitution of Conjugal Rights, Satisfaction of Decree

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M. P. Shreevastava

Appellant

Mrs. Veena

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Punjab High Court Letters Patent Appeal No. 96 D of 1964

  1. 1 Whether an application by the judgment-debtor for recording satisfaction of a decree for restitution of conjugal rights is maintainable in absence of execution application by decree-holder.
  2. 2 Whether Section 47 or Order 21 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure governs such application.

Ratio Decidendi

An application by the judgment-debtor for recording satisfaction of a decree for restitution of conjugal rights is maintainable under Section 47 CPC, even where the decree-holder has not applied for execution. Order 21 Rule 2 does not apply absent consent for adjustment between the parties.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Application by respondent for recording satisfaction of the decree for restitution of conjugal rights is maintainable under Section 47 CPC.
  • No costs awarded.