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

1957 Supreme(Pat) 141

SINHA, K.DAYAL
Baijnath Prasad Singh – Appellant
Versus
Dasrath Prasad Singh – Respondent


Judgment

Dayal, J.

1. This is an application in revision by the judgment-debtor. The material facts are these:

The opposite party obtained a decree for possession of the disputed lands and for costs from the Court of the Subordinate Judge, First Court, Monghyr. Thereafter, the decree-holders filed Execution case, No. 12 of 1950 in the same Court. On the 16th June 1953, the learned Subordinate Judge held that he had no jurisdiction to execute the decree and observed that the remedy of the decree-holders was to apply for transmission of the decree to the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Begusarai, by a regular petition. After the above order, the decree-holders applied before the learned District Judge, Monghyr, to transfer the execution case to the Subordinate Judge, Begusarai, and the learned District Judge, without issuing notice to the petitioner, ordered the execution case to be transferred to the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Begusarai.

2. Being thus aggrieved, the judgment-debtor has filed this civil revision. It is contended by Mr. Prem Lall for the petitioner that the provisions as to notice contained in Sec.24 of the Code of Civil Procedure have been disregarded and the ord













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