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

1960 Supreme(Raj) 318

CHHANGANI
Nemichand – Appellant
Versus
Umedmal – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Hasti Mal, for Appellants; L.M. Singhvi, for Respondent

CHHANGANI, J.—This second appeal by the judgment-debtors has been directed against the judgment and order of the Civil Judge, Sojat dated 20.7.1959 dismissing the appellants appeal and maintaining the dismissal of their objections.

2. The respondent obtained a decree against the appellants for an amount of Rs. 1,339.8.0 with costs and future interest on 30th November, 1942. An application for execution was presented on 18.2.1948 admittedly within the period of limitation then in force in Marwar. The execution application had a chequered career and did not yield any result for any number of years. It was dismissed in default on 6.2.1956 in the absence of the decree-holder and this advocate and in the presence of the advocate for the judgment-debtor Bhikamchand. The decree-holder put an application on 9.2.1956 for restoration of application for execution. After notice to the respondent-judgment-debtor Bhikamchand the application was restored on 26.4.1956. Subsequently in the execution proceedings the property of the judgment-debtor was sold a few times but for one reason or the other the sale had to be set-aside. On 29-12-1958 a fresh sale-proclamation for the sale of the house of the







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