LODHA
Gulab Bai – Appellant
Versus
Ram Pratap – Respondent
2. The facts leading to the proceedings out of which this revision arises are not in dispute. The plaintiff-respondent Rampratap filed the suit for recovery of Rs. 3600/-along with costs and interest against the defendant petitioner and prayed that in case the defendant did not pay the amount within such period as may be fixed by the court, a direction may be given for sale of the mortgaged property. After trial the learned Munsiff, Kota passed a preliminary decree on 11-1-1971 under O. 34, r. 4 CPC for a sum of Rs. 3600/-, and it was further ordered that the defendant shall pay into the court the
(2) Thirugnanavalli Ammal vs. Venugopala Pillai (AIR 1940 Mad. 29)
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.