The Calcutta High Court, while dismissing an application filed for recalling a part of the Judgment and Decree passed by this Court and to allow the plaintiff to pursue its claim for interest and cost in accordance with law or in the alternative, held that the amendment for modification cannot be allowed as the original decree has already been executed with full satisfaction and there is no provision for an amendment of modification of the judgment and the decree once the decree is executed.
Brief Facts:
The plaintiff had filed a praying for a decree for Rs. 83,46,507/- along with interest at the rate of 17% per annum. The plaintiff has filed an application under Chapter XIIIA of the Original Side Rules of this Court for final judgment and decree. The defendant contested the said application. This court passed a decree on admission directing the defendant to pay Rs. 83,46,507/- to the plaintiff and the suit along with the application were disposed of. The plaintiff filed an execution case before the Executing Court. The judgment debtor failed to appear, and accordingly warrant of arrest was issued against the judgment debtor. Before the Executing Court, the decree-holder claimed cost but the Executing Court did not entertain the claim of the decree-holder on the ground the Trial Court had not granted cost to the decree-holder. Now, the decree-holder has filed the present application.
Contentions of the Plaintiff:
The Learned Counsel for the Plaintiff submitted that the plaintiff prayed for interest on the principal amount at the rate of 17% per annum until realization and also cost as the disputes are commercial in nature but this Court did not consider the prayer of the plaintiff for grant of interest and cost. He argued that this Court had no occasion to consider or deal with the claim of interest and cost as this Court was only considering the application for summary judgment and thus the judgment and decree are required to be recalled so as to enable the plaintiff to pursue the claim of interest and cost.
Contentions of the Defendant:
The Learned Counsel for the Defendant submitted that once the Court passed the judgment and decree and the plaintiff on being satisfied had initiated the execution proceeding and the execution preceding has been disposed of with full satisfaction, the application filed by the plaintiff praying for recalling of the judgment and decree is not maintainable.
Observations of the Court:
The Court noted that the proviso of Sub-Section 2 of Section 35 provides that the Court may make an order deviating from the general rule for reasons to be recorded in writing. The plaintiff had obtained a decree and had filed an execution proceeding for the realization of the decretal amount. The defendant being the judgment debtor had appeared and paid the decretal amount which was duly accepted by the plaintiff. Now, the plaintiff has filed the present application for recalling the part of the Judgment and Decree dated 8th December 2022 and permitting the plaintiff to pursue its claim for interest and cost.
The Court observed that the amendment for modification cannot be allowed as the original decree has already been executed with full satisfaction and there is no provision for an amendment of modification of the judgment and the decree once the decree is executed.
The decision of the Court:
The Calcutta High Court, dismissing the application, held that there is no merit in the application.
Case Title: Anchor Investment Private Limited v TCI Finance Limited
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Krishna Rao
Case no.: IA No. G.A. (Com) 6 of 2024
Advocate for the Plaintiff: Mr. Rajarshi Dutta
Advocate for the Defendant: Mr. Rudraman Bhattacharya
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
