ABHAY S. OKA, RAJESH BINDAL
Bhasker – Appellant
Versus
Ayodhya Jewellers – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Abhay S. Oka, J.)
1. Leave granted.
FACTUAL ASPECTS
2. The issue which arises for consideration in this appeal is what is the starting point of limitation for filing an application under Rule 95 of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘CPC’).
3. The property subject matter of this appeal held by the appellants was sold in execution of a decree passed against the appellants in a public auction. The respondent is the purchaser of the property. The order of confirmation of sale in accordance with sub-rule (1) of Rule 92 of Order XXI of CPC was passed on 16th July 2009. The sale certificate under Rule 94 of Order XXI of CPC was issued by the Executing Court to the respondent on 5th February 2010. On 27th July 2010, the respondent filed an application under Rule 95 of Order XXI of CPC before the Executing Court. The said application was allowed by the Executing Court. The appellants applied for a review of the said order. The prayer for review was dismissed by the Executing Court. The appellants challenged the orders of the Executing Court by filing a Civil Re
United Finance Corporation v. M.S.M. Haneefa (dead) thr. LRs.
Pattam Khader Khan v. Pattam Sardar Khan & Anr, (1996) 5 SCC 48 [Para 4
Shri Mandir Sita Ramji v. Lt. Governor of Delhi
Surjit Singh Kalra v. Union of India & Anr
Hameedia Hardware Stores v. B. Mohan Lal Sowcar
Sirajul Haq Khan v. Sunni Central Board of Waqf, 1959 SCR 1287
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.