AIR 1997 SUPREME COURT 1006 ::1997 SCFBRC 71 ::(1997) 1 WLC (RAJ) 303 ::1997 (1) UJ (SC) 227 ::1997 UJ(SC) 1 227 ::1997 (2) Civ LJ 37 ::(1997) 1 All RentCas 273 ::1997 (1) SCC 373 ::(1997) 2 RecCivR 8 ::1997 All CJ 1 527 ::(1996) 4 CurCC 226 ::(1997) 1 APLJ 37 ::(1997) 2 ICC 250 ::1997 (2) MadLW 521 ::(1997) 2 LJR 1 ::(1996) 1 Raj LR 158 ::(1997) 2 SCT 178 ::1997 (1) RajLW 53 ::1997 (1) RentLR 1 ::(1997) 3 LandLR 538

Supreme Court Of India

(From: Rajasthan)*

Hon'ble Judge(s): Kuldip Singh, S. Saghir Ahmad , JJ

(A) Civil P.C. (5 of 1908) , S.47, O.21 R.2(3)— Execution - Compromise of rights by parties amounting to adjustment of decree - Not reported to executing Court and therefore not certified or recorded so, by executing Court - Court can proceed to execute decree. S. B. C. R. P. No. 236 of 1993, D/- 21-9-1993 (Rajasthan), reversed.(1979) 2 Ren C. R. 1 (Raj) and AIR 1973 All 40, Overruled.Interpretation of statutes - Harmonious construction. When there are two conflicting provisions in an Act, which cannot be reconciled with each other, they should be so interpreted that, if possible effect should be given to both. This is the essence of the rule of "harmonious construction". The Courts have also to keep in mind that an interpretation which reduces one of the provisions as a "dead letter" or "useless lumber" is not harmonious construction. To harmonise is not to destroy any statutory provision or to render it construction.(Para 12) Interpreting the provisions of Section 47 and Order XXI Rule in the light of the above principles, there does appear to be any antithesis between the two provisions. Section 47 deals with the power of the Court executing the decree while order XXI, Rule 2 deals with the procedure which a Court whose duty it is to execute the decree has to follow in a limited class of cases relating to the ....