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

1934 Supreme(Mad) 363

Ramasesha Iyer – Appellant
Versus
C. V. Ramanujachariar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. Appellant 1 is the decree, holder in O.S. No. 59 of 1917 on the file of the Sub-Court, Trichinopoly. Appellant 2 is the auction-purchaser of the properties sold in execution of that decree. The respondent is the Official Receiver in I.P. No. 19 of 1918 on the file of the District Court of Salem. This appeal arises out of a petition under Order 21, Rule 90, Civil P.C., filed by the respondent to set aside the sale of the properties sold in execution of the decree in O.S. No. 59 of 1917 on account of various alleged irregularities. The circumstances are these. On 26th September 1917 appellant 1 obtained a decree for money in O.S. No. 59 of 1917 against defendant 1 therein, the father, and three other defendants, his sons.

2. In execution of the decree he attached on 23rd November 1917 the properties belonging to the defendants. On 11th December 1919 defendant 1, the father, was adjulged insolvent in I. P. No. 19 of 1918 and his property became vested in the respondent, the Official Receiver, appointed by the Court. On 10th September 1920 the sons, (defendants 2, 3 and 4 in O.S. No. 59 of 1917) instituted a suit for partition, O.S. No. 31 of 1920, in the District Court of Sa





















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