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

1968 Supreme(Guj) 44

V.R.SHAH
BAI VASANTI WD/o. PATEL ISHWARLAL CHIMANLAL – Appellant
Versus
SURYAPRASAD ISHWARLAL PATEL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: B.J.SHELAT, S.K.ZAVERI

V. R. SHAH, J.

( 1 ) THE appellant in this appeal is the judgment-creditor and she filed an execution application to execute the decree. It has been dismissed by the executing Court on the ground that it is barred by limitation. It is against this order that this appeal has been brought by the judgment-creditor.

( 2 ) AT the time when this appeal was taken up for hearing Mr. Zaveri learned Advocate for the respondent raised a preliminary objection that an appeal from order cannot lie but it should have been filed as a First Appeal. The learned Advocate for the appellant Mr. Shelat agrees to this and both Advocates have no objection to this appeal being treated as First Appeal. I therefore direct that this appeal may be registered as First Appeal and I proceed to dispose it of on that basis.

( 3 ) THE appellant filed the suit for maintenance of both past and future as well as for a declaration of her right to a share in the property. A compromise purshis was put by the parties before the Court on 20th March 1958. By this compromise the defendant was to pay Rs. 1100. 00 on account of mesne profits for the period 1st April 1954 to 20th March 1958 within three months from the date of th






















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