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

2005 Supreme(Raj) 2354

KHEM CHAND SHARMA
Alwar Prakashan – Appellant
Versus
K. K. Shrimal – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Dr. Prakash Chandra Jain, for the Appellants.
Mr. G.P. Sharma, for the Respondent.

Judgment

Khem Chand Sharma, J.- Since, common question of law and facts are involved in all these appeals filed by the defendants appellants arising out of the orders allowing the applications filed by the plaintiffs under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, CPC as also the applications filed under Order 38 Rule 5, CPC, therefore, they are being decided by this common Judgment .

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that plaintiffs filed civil suits for recovery of loan amount against the defendants. Alongwith the suits, the plaintiffs filed applications under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, CPC, alleging therein that the defendants with a view to defrauding the creditors intend or threaten to dispose of the property and prayed to restrain the defendants from selling, mortgaging or alienating the property. The plaintiffs also filed applications under Order 38 Rule 5, CPC, alleging therein that the defendants with intent to obstruct and delay the execution of decree that may be passed against them are about to dispose of the property mentioned in the applications. The learned trial Court, having found prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss in favour of the plaintiffs allowe













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