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

2000 Supreme(AP) 46

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : R.M.BAPAT
Shaik Shafik Ahammad - Appellant
Versus
Shalk Masthan Valli - Respondent
Decided On : 01-28-00

Headnote:

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Order 38 Rule 5 - Criminal Trial - Amount recovery - Petitioner herein was the plaintiff, who had instituted O. S. against the defendant respondent herein for recovery of certain amount due under the pronote - Held, The legal position explained by the learned Judge is not correct - If this property is attached before judgment and if the decree is passed in the suit, then the plaintiff-petitioner herein will have second claim and he can recover the money due under the decree when the claim of the earlier mortgagee is satisfied - Hence, this court allows I. A. which is pending on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge - Civil revision petition allowed

R. M. BAPAT, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner herein was the plaintiff, who had instituted O. S. No. 233/99 in the court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, madanapalle against the defendant respondent herein for recovery of certain amount due under the pronote. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff-petitioner herein filed LA. No. 551/99 seeking an order of attachment before judgment under order 38 Rule 5 C. P. C. The said application was rejected. Hence the revision.

( 2 ) HEARD both sides.

( 3 ) IT appears from the impugned order that the learned Judge felt that since the property, which the plaintiff wants to get attached, is already mortgaged to third party, the application for attachment before judgment under Order 38 Rule 5 C. P. C. is not maintainable and hence the application was rejected.

( 4 ) THE legal position explained by the learned Judge is not correct. If this property is attached before judgment and if the decree is passed in the suit, then the plaintiff-petitioner herein will have second claim and he can recover the money due under the decree when the claim of the earlier mortgagee is satisfied. Hence, this court allows I. A. No. 551/99 in O. S. No. 233/99 which is pending on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, madanapalle.

( 5 ) WITH this direction, the civil revision petition is allowed. No costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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 Back to top