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

2002 Supreme(Cal) 647

KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA
UMA KANORIA – Appellant
Versus
PRADIP KUMAR DAGA – Respondent


KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA, J.

( 1 ) IN this execution application a point has been taken by the judgment debtors on the question of jurisdiction of this Court. The mode of assistance of the claim in this application is for oral examination of the judgment debtors namely Pradip Kumar Daga, Smt. Asha Daga, Yashwant Kumar Daga and Smt. Nandini Daga under Order XXI, Rule 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the Judgment debtors are also directed to make and file their affidavit, stating the particulars of the assets of the judgment debtors.

( 2 ) MR. Tilak Basu, learned Counsel while opposing his application contends that admittedly the notice from this department has been issued at the address of the judgment debtors situated at 5, Merline Park, Calcutta -700 019 outside the territorial limit of the Original Civil Jurisdiction of this Court. Therefore, his contention is that in view of provision of Section 39 of the Code of Civil Procedure as amended this Court has no power to execute this decree against the aforesaid persons who reside outside the local limits of this jurisdiction. He has drawn my attention to the recent amendment by way of insertion of sub-section (4) of Section 39 of















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