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

1960 Supreme(Pat) 131

KANHAIYA SINGH, V.RAMASWAMI
Arthur Butler And Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Gulf Oil (India) Private Ltd. – Respondent


Judgment

1. In this case the petitioner, Messrs, Arthur Butler and Company Limited, obtained a rule from the High Court, asking the opposite parties to show cause why the order of the 1st Subordinate Judge of Muzaffarpur, dated the 10th September, 1957, directing the petitioner to be proceeded against as a garnishee in the execution case brought by the decree-holder opposite parties, should not be set aside by the High Court in its revisional jurisdiction.

2. It appears that opposite party No. 1 had obtained a decree against opposite party No. 2 in Execution Case No. 145 of 1955. In execution of the decree opposite party No. 1 attached nine Rollers which were in the custody of the petitioner for the purpose of repair and deshelling and re-shelling. The decree-holder opposite party No. 1 also got a notice issued and served on the petitioner under Order 21, Rule 46 of the Code of Civil Procedure, prohibiting the petitioner from delivering the Rollers "to any person whomsoever until further orders".

The case of the petitioner is that this notice was not served upon him, and between the 1st March, 1956, the judgment-debtor opposite party No. 2 took delivery of the Rollers in question fr









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