UMAMAHESWARAM
Peddireddi Ganga Raju – Appellant
Versus
Kandula Mangamma – Respondent
2. In order to appreciate the contention raised by Sri Adavi Kama Rao, the learned Advocate for the Petitioner, it is necessary to set out a few relevant facts. The respondents herein filed E. P. No. 429 of 1953 in execution of his decree in S. C. No. 476 of 1952 and attached the cattle belonging to the 3rd judgment-debtor Mangamma. The cattle were entrusted to a surety who executed a bond undertaking to produce the cattle as and when called upon to do so.
As the surety did not later on produce the cattle, the Execution Petition was dismissed on 1-3-1954. The decree-holder thereupon filed E. P. No. 237 of 1954 on 8-3-1954. Meanwhile the same cattle were attached by the petitioner herein in E. P. No. 260 of 1954 in execution of his decree in S. C. No. 674 of 1953 and a sum of Rs. 362-13-0 was realised by sale on 22-9-1954. The respondent herein contended that as he had filed E. P. No, 237 of
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.