BHARGAVA
Rajja Babu Kothari – Appellant
Versus
Sayed Mohammad – Respondent
2. It appears that Dhaniram Sitalprasad and Ayodhya Prasad ancestors of the appellants obtained a decree on 25th February, 1924 for a sum of Rs. 3039/11/3 against one Talib Hussain in whose place the names of the present respondents have been substituted as his legal representatives.In execution of the decree some properties were auctioned and out of the sale proceeds the decree holders were paid Rs. 9041/4/3. The decree was declared satisfied and the execution proceedings were struck off. On 27th January, 1953 respondent learned Civil Judge overruled those objections and ordered that Rs. 1309/-/5 be refunded to the judgment debtor which has been paid in excess. On "appeal the learned District Judge, Bharatpur affirmed the said order and hence this second appeal.
3. It has been contended in this Court that:
(i) as the decree had been fully satisfied and the execution case struck off the executing court had become functus officio and had no jurisdiction to entertain th
(12) Merla Ramanna Vs. Nillaparaju (AIR 1956 SC 87)
(16) Mohanlal Goenka Vs. Beney Kishna Mukherjee (AIR 1953 SC 65)
(10) Irulayee Ammal Vs. T. V. Murugiah (AIR 1950 Mad 640)
(11) Julien Marret Vs. Mohammed Khaleel Shayazi & Sons (AIR 1930 P.C. 86)
(17) Thakur Amar Singh Vs. Gulabchand (1960 RLW, 149 = ILR 10
(18) Ulaganatha Mudaliar Vs. Molaveedu Alagappa Mudaliar (AIR 1929 Mad. 903)
(20) Alluri Bapanna Vs. Inuganti Vengayya (AIR 1937 Mad. 511)
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.