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

1937 Supreme(Mad) 401

VENKATASUBBA RAO
Kotta Annapurnamma – Appellant
Versus
Makku Venkamma – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Venkatasubba Rao, J.

1. The question in this Letters Patent Appeal is, whether the view of the learned Judge that the execution petition in question is barred by limitation, is right. The lower Court had decided that the petition was in time and that decision was reversed by the learned Judge. The starting point under Article 182(5) of the Limitation Act is:

The date of the final order passed on an application made in accordance with law to the proper Court for execution or to take some step in aid of the execution of the decree.

2. One Subbaraju obtained the final decree in the mortgage suit in question on 9th September, 1926, and the present petition was filed by his widow Annapurnamma on 23rd December, 1931, for execution of that decree. It is contended that this execution petition is in time, by reason of a previous petition for execution filed on 15th October, 1928, which was dismissed by an order, dated 15th April, 1929. The short point for decision is, whether the previous execution petition fulfills the requirements of Article 182(5), for, if it does, the present petition, having been filed as it has been, within three years of the order referred to above made upon it,











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