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

1990 Supreme(Mad) 934

SRINIVASAN
M. S. Doraisami Iyer – Appellant
Versus
A. R. Arunachalam Chettiar and Others – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:M.V. Venkataseshan, V. Krishnan, S.V. Jayaraman, Advocates.

Judgment :-

This Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal is against an order dismissing an appeal filed by the appellant against an order dismissing his application under Order 21, Rule 58, C.P.C. for excluding the property in question from the execution proceedings inititated against the same by the first respondent herein.

2. The short facts which are necessary to understand the claim made by the appellant are these: The appellant filed a suit, O.S. No. 127 of 1966 against the second respondent for recovery of Rs. 17, 512.67 and obtained a decree. The second respondent filed an appeal in this Court, A.S. 377 of 1967. When the appeal was pending an order was made by this Court in an application for stay filed by the second respondent directing him to furnish security in the shape of immovable property for a sum of Rs. 10, 000/- as condition for stay. The second respondent filed an application in the trial Court for accepting the property in question as security. He filed a draft security bond on 9-11-1967. The petition for acceptance of security was being adjourned from time to time for various reasons. On 7-12-1967 the property was treated and it was found to be worth Rs. 17, 000/-. Eve









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