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

1944 Supreme(Cal) 112

DAS
Arratoon and Co. – Appellant
Versus
Mimraj Puranmull – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Das, J. - This is an application for the execution of the decree passed in this suit. The suit was filed in 1931 by the plaintiff firm against Mimraj Puranmull, described as a firm in the cause title of the plaint. It was for the recovery of Rs. 22,727-0-6 due to the plaintiff firm in respect of certain dealings and transactions in shel lac, Kiri lac and other lac products. The writ of summons in the suit was, with the leave of this Court under Order 30, Rule 3, Civil P.C., served on Mimraj, Puranmull, Hardattrai and Jodhraj as four of the partners of the defendant firm. No appearance having been entered by any of the four partners served as aforesaid or by any other partner, the suit came up for hearing as an undefended suit and an ex parte decree was passed on 14-12-1931 for Rs. 22,727-0-6 with costs and interest on judgment at 6 per cent, per annum. The costs of the plaintiff firm having been taxed an allocatur was issued on 23-5-1932 for Rs. 316-12-0.

2. On or about 21-6-1935 the decree was transmitted by this Court to the Court of the District Judge of Purulia for execution against the four partners served as aforesaid. In the meantime one of these four partners, namely

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