SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(SC) 1134

A. S. ANAND, K. G. BALAKRISHNAN, R. C. LAHOTI
H. V. Panchaksharappa – Appellant
Versus
K. G. Eshwar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

The appellant engaged respondent, an advocate, to file a suit against one Siddaramma Shetty for recovery of Rs. 60,175/- on the basis of a pronote in the Court of Civil Judge, Shimoga. The suit was numbered as O.S. No. 237/1986. During the pendency of the suit, property situate in Nehru Road belonging to defendant Siddaramma Shetty was got attached by a Court order. The suit was compromised on 16.1.1987. It appears that the attachment of the property continued even after judgment. Prior to the filing of O.S. No. 237/1986, the respondent as a lawyer, had also filed a suit on behalf of Siddaramma Shetty before the Civil Judge. That suit was a partition suit and was numbered as O.S. No. 119/1986. The property involved in the partition suit was the same property which became subject matter of attachment in O.S. No. 237/1986. In the partition suit (O.S. No. 119/1986), admittedly, the appellant was not a party. In that suit Siddaramma Shetty had obtained an injunction against the defendants therein with regard to the property situate at Nehru Road, subject matter of attachment in O.S. No. 237/1986.

2. Despite the compromise entered into on 16.1.1987 in O.S. No. 237/1986, Siddaramm











Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top