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

2006 Supreme(Guj) 567

D.A.MEHTA
GAUTAM TRADING COMPANY THRO. PROPRIETOR – Appellant
Versus
UMA TRANSPORT TRADING CO. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: B.K.DAMANI, K.V.SHELAT, M.B.GANDHI, M.J.THAKORE

( 1 ) THIS petition, though styled as a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, is in effect a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner herein is a third party obstructer, respondent No. 1 is the original plaintiff of H. R. P. No. 475 of 1988 while respondent No. 2 is defendant in H. R. P. No. 475 of 1988. The suit came to be decreed in favour of the plaintiff and the defendant, after carrying the matter right upto Supreme Court, failed to get the judgment and order reversed. The plaintiff, accordingly, moved execution proceedings bearing Darkhast No. 255 of 2003. The plaintiff is thus the decree-holder and the defendant is the judgment-debtor while the petitioner herein is the third party applicant. For the sake of convenience the parties shall be accordingly referred to hereinafter.

( 2 ) DURING pendency of execution proceedings, on 24th June, 2003 the third party applicant moved an application Exh. 10 which, according to third party applicant, was an obstruction application. The said application was accompanied by another application of even date being Exh. 11 wherein the third party applicant sought permission to exhibit documents

























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