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

1934 Supreme(Cal) 330

Kusum Kamini Debi – Appellant
Versus
Sailesh Chandra Chakravarty – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. This is an appeal by the decree-holder in an execution case. It appears that the appellant obtained a decree for Rs. 6,399-9-6 and costs Rupees 4-1-3 against the judgment-debtors. It further appears that on the application of the decree-holder the decree was split up into two parts and a certificate for the execution of one part of the decree, namely Rs. 1,500, was sent to the Subordinate Judge's Court at Dinajpur. The objection of the judgment-debtors was that the execution case was not maintainable inasmuch as the decree-holder had no right to split up the decree in this way. This objection of the judgment-debtors has been given effect to by the learned Subordinate Judge and the execution case has been dismissed. Hence the present appeal by the decree-holder.

2. Section 39, Civil P.C, lays down that the Court which passed a decree may, on the application of the decree-holder send it for execution to another Court. Evidently the section contemplates that the entire decree and not a part of it is to be sent for execution to other Court or Courts. There is no provision in the CPC under which a decree-holder who has obtained a decree can divide a decree into several parts a

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