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

1977 Supreme(AP) 220

CHENNAKESAVA REDDY
Satyavolu Venkata Bhaskara Umamaheswara Varaprasada Murthy – Appellant
Versus
Potti Veeraraju – Respondent


CHENNAKESAV REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision petition arises out of execution proceedings initiated by the auction purchaser, the first respondent herein under O, 21, R. 93, C. P. C, for recovery of the purchase money and other expenses from the decree-holder and the judgment-debtor, the petitioner and the second respondent respectively in the revision petition.

( 2 ) THE decree-holder and judgment-debtor are brothers. The decree-holder obtained three money decrees against his brother in three suits in O. S. No. 17 of 1956, O. S. No. 63/55 and O. S. No. 2 of 1956 on the file of the District Court, East Godavari at Rajahmundry. All the three decrees were compromise decrees creating a charge on three items of property belonging to the judgment-debtor.

( 3 ) IN execution of the decree in O. S. No. 17 of 1956, the decree-holder brought Item No. 1 of the charged property to sale, in E. P. No. 13 of 1960. The auction was held on 28-8-1961. . The first respondent was the highest bidder for Rupees 13,000/ -. He deposited into the Court the entire sale price by 6-9-1961 as required under the conditions of sale. The sale was posted for confirmation to 19-7-1962.

( 4 ) WHILE the matters stood thu















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