JUDGMENT Woodroffe, J. - This is an application under sec. 223 for the transmission of a decree from this Court for execution to another Court. The decree is one more than a year old and therefore notice must be given to the judgment debtor. The question is whether this notice must be issued by this Court or by the Court to which the decree is transmitted. I am informed that the general practice of the Court has hitherto been to allow notice under sec. 248 to be issued by the Court to which the decree is transmitted and that it is not necessary that it should be, though it may be, issued by this Court. On the other hand, my attention has been drawn to a judgment of Mr. Justice Chitty (Unreported: Suit No. 258 of 1896: Joy Chand Lall v. Chuterput Sing : Order, dated 2nd September 1907) in which he held that notice must issue from this Court. The question must be determined with reference to the terms of the Code. I have consulted my learned brother and he agrees with me that the practice as here laid down should be followed. The explanation to sec. 248 says that in that section the phrase "the Court" means the Court by which the decree was passed, unless the decree has been Bent to another Court for execution, in which case, it means such other Court, Now, that explanation can only apply to cases which fall within that section and sec. 248 requires the issue of notice only where execution is applied for. In the present case, execution is not applied for under sec. 248 but application is made under sec. 223 for the transmission of the decree, under which section no notice is required to issue. The application though one on execution is not for execution. Moreover, the explanation refers to the case where a decree has been sent to another Court. That is not the case here, as the decree has not been transferred, though an application has been made for that purpose. It may, no doubt, be contended that it is advisable for a Court, before transmitting a decree, to issue notice and to determine whether there is any objection to execution. But the question before me is whether this is execution. I think not. It may, no doubt, be contended that it is advisable for a Court, before transmitting a decree, to issue notice and to determine whether there is any objection to execution. But the question before me is whether this is execution. I think not. In some cases, it may be more convenient that a decree be transmitted to another Court without notice being first issued by the trasmitting Court. In other cases, the balance of convenience may be the other way. The Court has a discretion in the matter, The considerations which apply in the case of a decree transmitted to this Court are not the same as those which apply to a decree which this Court transmits. Ordinarily, I think, it is more convenient, in cases such as those before me, that notice should issue by the Court to which the decree is transferred and within whose jurisdiction the judgment debtor probably is. I think, this is the case here and I, therefore, direct the transmission of the decree as prayed and that notice under sec 248 be given by the Court to which the decree is hereby directed to be transmitted.