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

1995 Supreme(Kar) 498

H.N.TILHARI
TALARI THIPPESWAMY – Appellant
Versus
K. DODDAPPA – Respondent


Advocates:
BASAVARAJ KAREDDY, K.NAGESWARA RAO

H. N. TILHARI, J.

( 1 ) THIS Revision is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 18th September, 1995, whereby the learned Munsiff, Bellary, dismissed the revision petitioner's application for setting aside the sale under Order 21, Rule 90r/w Sec. 151 of Code of Civil Procedure. A preliminary objection had been raised on behalf of respondent by Sri Basavaraja Kareddy that the order is appealable and the present revision is not maintainable in view of provision of sub-sec. (2) of Sec. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. He submitted that the order impugned herein is appealable and the appeal lies to the District Court. The learned counsel for the applicant tried to meet the objections by submitting that expression of Section 47 has been removed from the definition of the decree and as the order does not amounts to decree, there is no question of appeal being filed and as such the revision is entertainable. Later on the learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to Order 43, Rule 1 (j) and submitted that there is thin margin and it is a case of Order in substance under O. 47. I have considered respective contentions and applied my mind. That an application for setti





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