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

1993 Supreme(Kar) 206

R.RAMAKRISHNA
B. RAGHURAMA SHETTY – Appellant
Versus
KARNATAKA BANK LTD. , MANGALORE – Respondent


Advocates:
ASHOK HARANAHAFLI, K.Gopal Hegde

R. RAMAKRISHNA, J.

( 1 ) THE question of law involved in this revision is:"whether the provisions of order xxi, rule 64 of the Code of Civil Procedure are not applicable to the sale of mortgaged properties under execution?"

( 2 ) THE petitioner is a judgment-debtor in execution case no. 322 of 1987 arising out of o. s. no. 93 of 1980 pending on the file of the learned civil judge, udupi, dakshina kannada. The said execution is filed by the respondent for recovery of Rs. 1,03,581-74 p. Assistance of the court is required for the recovery of the said amount by the sale of the mortgaged properties set out in the preliminary decree.

( 3 ) THIS preliminary decree was passed in o. s. no. 93 of 1980by virtue of a joint memo filed by both the parties. The properties subjected to mortgage and the properties offered as collateral security are set out in the preliminary decree dated 12-9-1981, they are classified by the petitioner before the executing court as follows: (1) a rice mill building with backyard for drying. (2) a residential house with front-yard. (3) about 0. 50 acres of coconut garden and about 2 acres of wet land.

( 4 ) THOUGH the judgment-debtor raised contentions that sale ofag












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