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

1994 Supreme(Mad) 762

THANIKKACHALAM
Gnanadurai – Appellant
Versus
Suseelammal – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:P. Seshadri, N. Krishnamurthy, Advocates.

Judgment :-

This petition was filed to condone the delay of 684 days in filing the revision. The auction purchaser - Decree holder is the petitioner herein. The respondent is the Judgment-Debtor. The Judgment-debtor filed an application under Section 47 of Civil Procedure Code questioning the execution, discharge or satisfaction of the decree obtained by the decree-holder. The above said application was allowed. Thereafter the auction purchaser, who is the petitioner herein filed an appeal C.M.A. No. 14 of 1988 against the order passed in Application filed under Section 47 of the Civil Procedure Code. The said application was ultimately dismissed by the appellate Court stating that only a revision will lie against the order passed in application filed under Section 47 of Civil Procedure Code and directed the auction-purchaser to approach the proper Court for filing the revision. It is thereafter the present revision was filed.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the appeal was prosecuted bona fide by the appellant, the time during which the appeal was pending should be excluded and condoned. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent submitt








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