Gopalkrishna Kammath vs R. Bhaskar Rao on 28 July, 1988
Sm. Mana Devi v. Malki Ram, AIR 1961 All 184, Abdul Mokit v. Abdul Rashid, AIR 1929 Patna 391 and Niyaz Biv. Amdumiyan, AIR 1949 Nagpur 375 argues that the remedy of the petitioner, if any, is to institute a suit for recovery of the movables delivered to the decree-holder in execution of the decree. The question considered in these decisions pertains to the claim of a judgment-debtor for damages resulting from acts done under cover of execution proceedings. In such cases it cannot be disputed that the remedy is not to approach the executing court under Section 47, C.P.C. but to institute a separate suit for the recovery of damages because the question is not one relating to the execution, discharge or satisfaction of the decree but is one outside the decree.