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

2010 Supreme(Ker) 431

THOMAS P.JOSEPH
Francis @ Porinju – Appellant
Versus
Navodaya Kuries & Loans (P) Ltd – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:For the Petitioner:P.B. Sahasranaman, K. Jagadeesh, Advocates. For the Respondents: No Appearance.

Judgment :-

"C.R."

1. Following points arise for a decision in this Writ Petition:

(i) Whether an attachment over immovable property ceases to have effect when that property is sold in auction in execution of another decree?

(ii) Whether the attachment would revive when the defendant whose property was attached later purchased the property from the auction purchaser?

2. Short facts necessary for a decision of the case are: Petitioner filed O.S. No.94 of 1989 in the court of learned Sub Judge, Irinjalakuda against predecessor-in-interest of respondent Nos.2 to 8 and others (hereinafter referred to as "the defendant) and in that suit, property of defendant was attached (before judgment) on 31.03.1989. There was also another suit against the defendant (O.S. No.1156 of 1991) in the same court where a decree for recovery of money was passed against defendant and others. Decree holder in O.S. No.1156 of 1991 sought execution of his decree and the same property belonging to the defendant was attached on 05.12.1994 and sold in court auction on 21.12.1995. That property was purchased by respondent No.1-decree holder in O.S. No.1156 of 1991. Respondent No.1 transferred that property to the de






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