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

1978 Supreme(Cal) 167

D.C.CHAKRAVORTI, M.M.DUTT
BALAI KUMAR SARKAR – Appellant
Versus
BIMAL CHANDRA SARKAR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
BHASKAR GHOSH, Mukul Prokash Banerjee, Saktinath Mukherjee, SANAT KUMAR SEAL

M. M. DUTT, J.

( 1 ) THIS Rule is at the instance of the defendant No. 1 and it is directed against Order No. 2 dated Feb. 16, 1977 of the Subordinate Judge, 4th Court, Alipore. The suit out of which this Rule arises has been instituted by the plaintiff-opposite party No. 1 against the petitioner and others for the recovery of the sum of Rs. 38,951. 10. The opposite party No. 1 filed an application under Order 38, Rule 5 of the Civil P. C. for attachment before judgment, inter alia, alleging therein that the defendants were avoiding payment of the plaintiff's dues and with intent to obstruct or delay the execution of the decree that would be passed in the suit against the defendants, they were about to dispose of their assets and had removed and/or had been removing their property from the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Court. Further, it was alleged that the defendants were trying to receive payment of the money from the Additional Chief Engineer, Bandel Thermal Power Station payable to the firm 'sarkar and Sarkar' of which the petitioner is the sole owner, in respect of the construction of the Training Institute-cum-Trainees Hostel at the said Power Station. By the impu







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