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

1998 Supreme(Mad) 1523

K.GOVINDARAJAN
I. Basha Khan – Appellant
Versus
K. Selvaraj and Others – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:Asha, M/s. Sarvabhauman Associates, T. Murugamanickam, Advocates.

Judgment :-

The Order of the Court was as follows :

One Hussain Bai got a decree in O. S. No. 536 of 1976 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Attur against the respondents. After obtaining the decree, he died. So, his wife Havab-Bi executed a power of attorney in favour of the petitioner to institute the Execution Petition to recover the decree amount from the respondents. The Court below on the basis of the objection raised by the respondents rejected the Execution Petition in E.P. No. 3 of 1991 on the ground that no succession certificate was produced under Section 214 of the Indian Succession Act. Aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the above Revision.

2. The only point that arises in this Revision for consideration is whether the wife of the deceased decree-holder can proceed with the Execution Petition filed by her power of attorney, without a succession certificate as contemplated under Section 214 of the said Act.

3. The execution proceedings cannot abate on the death of the deceased decree-holder, in view of Order 22 Rule 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and the legal representatives can therefore continue the proceedings without filing separate Execution petition by s























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