Section 52 of CPC

Section 52 of CPC

by

Introduction 

Section 52 of CPC deals with the enforcement of a decree against the legal representative of a deceased judgment-debtor. A legal representative is a person who has the legal authority to represent the estate of a deceased person. This section ensures that the decree-holder’s rights are not prejudiced by the death of the judgment-debtor.

Provisions of Section 52 of CPC

Section 52 provides that if a judgment-debtor dies before the decree has been fully satisfied, the decree-holder may apply to the court that passed the decree to execute the same against the legal representative of the deceased. The legal representative will be liable to the extent of the property of the deceased that has come to his hands and has not been duly disposed of.

Procedure for Execution of Decree Against Legal Representative

The procedure for execution of a decree against a legal representative is as follows:

  1. The decree-holder must apply to the court that passed the decree for execution of the decree against the legal representative.

  2. The application must be accompanied by a copy of the death certificate of the judgment-debtor and a certificate from the court of probate granting probate or letters of administration to the legal representative.

  3. The court will issue a notice to the legal representative to show cause why the decree should not be executed against him.

  4. If the legal representative does not appear in court or does not show cause why the decree should not be executed against him, the court will order the execution of the decree against him.

  5. The legal representative may object to the execution of the decree on the ground that he is not liable to pay the amount of the decree or that the property of the deceased is not liable to be attached and sold.

  6. If the legal representative objects to the execution of the decree, the court will hear his objections and pass an order accordingly.

Extent of Liability of Legal Representative

The legal representative is liable to the extent of the property of the deceased that has come to his hands and has not been duly disposed of. If the property is not sufficient to satisfy the decree, the legal representative will not be personally liable for the balance.

Section 52 of CPC is an important provision that ensures that the decree-holder’s rights are not prejudiced by the death of the judgment-debtor. It provides a procedure for the execution of a decree against the legal representative of the deceased judgment-debtor. The legal representative is liable to the extent of the property of the deceased that has come to his hands and has not been duly disposed of.

Here are some case laws on Section 52 of CPC:

Krishan Pal Singh And Ors. vs Babulal And Ors. (1969)

In this case, the Supreme Court of India held that the legal representative of a deceased judgment-debtor is liable to the extent of the property of the deceased that has come to his hands. The Court also held that the legal representative is not entitled to any greater rights than the original decree-holder had.

Deepchand vs Land Acquisition Officer (1994)

In this case, the Allahabad High Court held that the legal representative of a deceased judgment-debtor is not liable to pay more than the value of the property of the deceased that has come to his hands. The Court also held that the legal representative is not entitled to raise any defense that the original judgment-debtor could have raised against the decree-holder.

P.S. Narsimha vs Land Acquisition Officer (2012)

In this case, the Supreme Court of India held that the Court has a duty to control the affairs of a trust and its trustees under its discretionary powers under Section 49 of the Trust Act when they are being mismanaged. The Court also held that the Court should not stick on to hyper technicalities in respect of forms and procedures, and it is the duty of the principal civil court even to act suo motu whenever it is brought to the notice of the court that there is a misconduct or any other mal practice committed by the Trustees.

Registration Act | Unregistered Agreement To Sell Is Admissible As Evidence In Suit For Specific Performance : Supreme Court – LiveLaw (2023)

In this case, the Supreme Court of India held that an unregistered agreement to sell can be admitted as evidence of a contract in a suit for specific performance. The Court relied on the proviso to Section 49 of the CPC, which states that an unregistered document can be admitted as evidence if it is relevant to the subject matter of the suit.

Raj Kishore Prasad v. Ram Nath Singh

In this case, the Patna High Court held that a decree passed against a Hindu father was binding on his son who was born after the passing of the decree. The Court held that the son was the legal representative of his father and was liable to satisfy the decree to the extent of the property of his father that had come to his hands.

These are just a few examples of the many case laws that have been decided on Section 52 of CPC. The section is a complex one, and there is a great deal of case law that interprets it. If you are involved in a case that involves the execution of a decree against a legal representative, it is important to consult with an attorney to get legal advice.

Leave a Comment