ANDISON CO OPERATIVE INDUSTRIES LTD. SIALKOT vs Ch. NAZIR AHMAD
This matter arises from a petition seeking leave to appeal against the order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, which dismissed the petitioner's writ petition upholding the dismissal of its objection in execution proceedings. The core legal question was whether an executing court or authority can go behind a decree or award on the ground of limitation and refuse execution. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that in the execution of a decree or award, the executing court cannot go behind it unless the decree is a nullity, and an erroneous appreciation of limitation does not render the decree or award a nullity. The key principle laid down is that the question of limitation does not constitute a nullity so as to permit an executing court to look behind a binding award or decree.
- Can an executing court go behind a decree or award on the ground of limitation?
- Does an incorrect determination of limitation render an award or decree a nullity?
- Whether an executing court has jurisdiction to examine the correctness of a decree during execution proceedings?
- Section 54, Sind Co-operative Societies Act
ORDER
1. WAHIDUDDIN AHMAD, J.-Ch. Nazir Ahmad Cheema, respondent No. 1, on the 20th January 1962, deposited a sum of Rs. 5,000 with the petitioner's society. The petitioner's society failed to pay this amount. Respondent No. 1, thereupon, moved an application before the Registrar, Co-operative Society, to refer the dispute between the parties for arbitration under section 54 of the Sind Co- operative Societies Act. The Assistant Registrar, who was appointed as nominee, gave an award in favour of respondent No. 1 on the 26th March 1968. The petitioner filed an appeal against this order but he was unsuccessful. His revision was also dismissed by the Secretary, Government of Pakistan, Co-operative Department. His Writ Petition No. 1069/69 was also dismissed by the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, on the 15th July 1969.
2. On the 5th April 1969, respondent No. 1 filed an application for the execution of the decree which was given in his favour. The petitioner raised an objection that the same cannot be executed because the claim was barred by limitation. This objection was rejected on the 24th January 1970.
3. Appeal filed before the Registrar was dismissed on the ground that the petitioner has exhausted all the remedies available to him under the Act. This objection was raised before the High Court in Writ Petition No. 336 of 1970 but it was dismissed on the 6th March 1970. The High Court of West Pakistan held that in execution of a decree the Court cannot go behind the decree itself, unless the decree is a nullity for some reason. It observed that the question of limitation, even if it was not properly appreciated by the Court or the authority which passes an order, does not render the decree or an order or an award, a nullity. The executing Court had no jurisdiction to go behind the award. The petitioner seeks permission to file an appeal against the said order.