Perera vs Aberan Appu – clr volume 3 page 024

In the case between the execution-creditor (appellant) and the first seven defendants (alleged wrongful claimants of seized property under a prior money decree), along with additional parties connected to succession and execution proceedings, the court addressed whether a plaintiff invoking section 247 of the Civil Procedure Code must specifically allege and prove the existence of an unsatisfied money decree at the date of action. It was held that the absence of such an averment constituted a fatal defect in the plaint, but outright dismissal was deemed unduly severe. The proper course was determined to be permitting an amendment to the plaint, upon payment of costs, to accurately reflect any outstanding judgment debt. This decision reaffirmed the principle that substantive procedural requ