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

1978 Supreme(SC) 353

P. S. KAILASAM, Y. V. CHANDRACHUD, A. D. KOSHAL
Raghunath Pradhani – Appellant
Versus
Damodra Mahapatra – Respondent


Advocates:
SARDAR BAHADUR SAHARYA, VISHNU BAHADUR SAHARYA

JUDGMENT

CHANDRACHUD, CJI.:— Respondent 1 obtained a money decree on August 18, 1962 against respondent 3 and his mother respondent 4. On June 28, 1963 respondent 1 filed an execution petition for recovering the decretal amount and prayed therein for attachment of the immovable property belonging to respondent 3. The property was attached by an order passed by the Executing Court on July 13, 1963. On November 27, 1963 respondent 1 filed an application in the Executing Court praying that permission be obtained of the Revenue Divisional Officer for sale of the property since respondent 3 to whom the property belonged was a member of the Scheduled Tribe. The permission was considered necessary by reason of the provisions contained in Cl. 6 of the "Orissa Scheduled Areas Transfer of Immovable Property by Scheduled Tribes Regulation No. 2 of 1956." It provides:

In execution of money decree against a member of a Schedule Tribe no right, title or interest held by him in any immovable property within any scheduled area shall be liable to be attached and sold except as and if prescribed.

Rule 4 made under the aforesaid Regulation provides:

There shall be no attachment or sale of immovable prop
















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