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

1920 Supreme(SC) 69

VISCOUNT CAVE, LORD MOULTON, LORD PHILLIMORE
MAHARAJA OF DARBHANGA – Appellant
Versus
HOMESHVAR SINGH – Respondent


Advocates:
Solicitors for appellant: Pugh & Co.
Solicitors for respondents: Barrow, Rogers & Nevill.

Judgement

Appeal from a judgment and decree of the High Court (May 4, 1917) reversing a decree of the Subordinate Judge of Bhagalpur (January 19, 1916).

The sole question in the appeal was whether the execution of a decree made in a civil suit and dated July 27, 1906, was barred by limitation upon the appellant applying on December 18, 1914, to execute it.

The facts appear from the judgment of their Lordships.

The decree of July 27, 1906, was in the following terms " .... it is ordered and decreed that the plaintiffs claim be decreed together with costs and interest at six per cent, per annum and the decretal amount be realized by the sale of the property belonging to Janeshvar Singh, which is in the defendants possession, and by virtue of this order the plaintiff will have no right to any portion of the property of Janeshvar Singh, which might be in possession of any one else except the defendant, and that the sum of Rs. 18,738-15-9, the amount claimed and Rs. 1286-10-0 on account of the costs of this suit be paid by the defendant to the plaintiff with interest thereon at the rate of six per cent, per annum from this date until realization."

The Subordinate Judge held that executi















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