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

1954 Supreme(Pat) 71

SINHA, BANERJI
Mohammad Ali Ismail – Appellant
Versus
Baldeo Singh – Respondent


Judgment

Sinha, J.

1. This appeal is by defendants to a suit for recovery of a certain sum of money on the basis of several handnotes. The handnotes were executed by defendant No. 1; defendant No. 2 is his brother and defendant No. 3 is his mother. After the institution of the suit, the plaintiff filed an application under Order 38, Rule 5, Order 39, Rule 1 and Sec.151, Civil P. C., and the prayer was that

"a rule be issued against the defendants to show cause why they would not furnish security to the extent of the plaintiffs principal claim and costs in all approximating to Rs. 17,000.00 and in the meantime they be restrained from disposing of the properties sought to be attached in any way and ad interim order for attachment before judgment be also passed and on the defendants failure to show cause or to furnish sufficient securities, the order aforesaid be made absolute....."

This application was made on 14-11-1949. Notices were issued to these defendants, and the order-sheet of 14-11-1949, records the following order :

"Plaintiff files a petition supported by an affidavit under Order 38, Rule 5 and Order 39, Rule 1, C. P. C., and under Sec.151, C.P.C., praying that a notice be






















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