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

1939 Supreme(Mad) 380

ALFRED HENRY LIONEL LEACH
Paladugu Veera Ramachandra Rao – Appellant
Versus
Paladugu Parasuramayya – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.

1. This appeal raises a question of limitation. On the 9th March, 1922, the first respondent obtained in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Bezwada a money decree against the appellant, the appellants uncle and a cousin, who were the members of an undivided family. The amount for which judgment was obtained was Rs. 3,735, but a mistake was made in drawing up the decree and the figure inserted was Rs.200. It was not until the 16th July, 1928, that the mistake was corrected under the provisions of Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure. On the 6th December, 1933, the respondent caused the decree to be transferred to the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Guntur for execution and on the 5th March, 1934, he applied for attachment of certain immovable property. The appellant objected to the attachment on the ground that the property was his personal property and the decree had only made him liable to the extent of his interest in the family property. This objection was well founded and the attachment was raised. On the 12th November, 1935, the respondent filed another application for execution. Here he asked for the attachment of two decrees,






















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