IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.388 of 2006 JAG JEETAN OJHA Versus SHAM BAHADUR OJHA & ANR ----------- 11 29.07.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the opposite parties. This Civil Revision application, in fact has become incompetent on account of its being dismissed against opposite party Nos.3 and 8 to 12. Ignoring this aspect of the matter, this Court has also heard the petitioner on merit. This Court would however not find any error in the impugned order dismissing the execution case to be barred by limitation inasmuch as the following three facts are absolutely admitted :- I. The Decree came to be passed on 23.3.1968 in Title Suit No. 203 of 1963 and such decree was also affirmed by the lower appellate Court by a judgment dated 2.5.1972 II. The decree holder did not choose to file execution case for next 12 years in terms of Article, 136 of the Limitation Act and in fact such an execution was levied almost after 16 years of the decree of the appellate Court, in the year, 1988 and that too was withdrawn unconditionally on 03.12.1994 without seeking leave for filing a fresh execution case. III. The present execution case was infact filed on - 2 - 17.12.1996 on a plea that the limitation period of 12 years would not apply because the decree was amended on 28.1.1997. In that view of the matter the court below has rightly held that the decree of the year, 1972 could not have been executed after 24 years. The plea that has been now advanced before this Court that the petitioner had rightly filed an execution case in the year, 1996 in view of the amendment made in the decree in the year1997 only would go to show that the petitioner has got a brilliant piece of litigating mind which was courageously and relentlessly pursued both before the Court below and this court without being aware of the statutory period of limitation of 12 years in filing of an execution case from the date of decree which cannot be even explained much less extended by any court. Thus there is absolutely no merit in such submission and if the decree of the Court below in favour of the petitioner could not be executed by him within the prescribed period of twelve years he has to only blame himself. Accordingly, there is no merit in this application and the same is hereby dismissed. BCJ (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)