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

1978 Supreme(AP) 440

V.MADHAVA RAO
SBAIK Mohd. HUSSAIN – Appellant
Versus
MADA REDDAIAH – Respondent


V. MADHAVA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a revision against the order of the Munsif Magistrate, Rayachoti, dated 14-6-1978 in E. P. No, 39 of 1977 rejecting the contention raised by the judgment-debtor that he is a small farmer and arresting him under Or. 21 rule 37 C. P. C. is illegal.

( 2 ) SRI K. Parvathisam, the learned counsel for the petitioner, contended that even if the petitioner is not a small farmer and the extent of the land held by him is more than what is required to be under Act 7 of 1977, the lower Court erred in directing the arrest of the petitioner without complying with the provisions of Sec, 51 C. P. C. The learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that this is mandatory on the part of the lower Court. He further contended that the Court below should have given a finding that the judgmen .-debtor is possessed of sufficient means to pay the amount of the decree or some substantial part thereof, but refused or neglected to pay the same. In the absence of such a finding, the order of arrest is illegal.

( 3 ) MR. M. N. Narasimhareddy, learned counsel for the respondent- decree-holder, on the other hand contended that the petitioner-judgment- debtor filed a petition on









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