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

1976 Supreme(Ker) 30

P.SUBRAMONIAN POTI, P.GOVINDA NAIR, P.NARAYANA PILLAI
GOUTAMI DEVI SITAMONY – Appellant
Versus
MADHAVAN SIVARAJAN – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. The question for decision in this appeal is whether the assignee from an appellant could seek to get impleaded in the appeal under 0.22 R.10 C. P. C. after the death of the appellant and after the period within which the appeal would abate under R.3 (2) of Order XXII by reason of the failure to implead legal representatives of the deceased appellant. This question arises under the following circumstances.

2. In execution of the decree in O. S.922 of 1963 of the 1st Additional Munsiff's Court, Trivandrum, the decree-schedule property was sold and that was purchased by a stranger in court auction. The auction-purchaser, in whose favour the sale was confirmed, sought to take delivery. This was objected to by the vendee of the property from the defendant in the suit. Such vendee made an application to set aside the sale and that application was ultimately allowed by the execution court. Against that order the auction-purchaser filed a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in the court below. Subsequent to the filing of this appeal he executed a deed in favour of the respondent here purporting to transfer his rights in the property purchased by him in the court-auction. That was on 1























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