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

1960 Supreme(Mad) 175

ANANTANARAYANAN
Alsidass Kaverlal – Appellant
Versus
J. Hiriya Gowder – Respondent


Advocates:
M/s. Pais, Lobo and Alwares, for Appellant.
T.R. Srinivasa Ayyar, for Respondent.

Judgment.-

This is an appeal by the petitioner decree-holder against the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Ootacamund in an execution application under Order, 21, rule 46, Civil Procedure Code. The facts are simple, and are as follows:

Originally the appellant (decree-holder) prayed to the Court below for the issue of a prohibitory order in respect of certain amounts payable by the Garrison Engineer, Wellington to the respondent (judgment-debtor), apparently relating to certain contracts for the Army executed by the judgment-debtor It is not in dispute before me that this application under Order 21, rule 46, Civil Procedure Code, was perfectly maintainable and in order, and that it related to the sums payable by the Garrison Engineer to the judgment-debtor up to the date of the application. As will be clear from a glance at Order 21, rule 46, Civil Procedure Code, that rule applies to attachment of certain kinds of property not in possession of the judgment-debtor, including a debt not secured by a negotiable instrument (rule 46 (a)) and other movable property (rule 46 (c)) not in the possession of the judgment-debtor. The present application was clearly under rule 46 (c), as








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