Sree Rajah Vadrevu Viswasundara – Appellant
Versus
Vannam Paidigadu, By Mother And – Respondent
1. The only point involved in this appeal is whether Article 180 is applicable to an application by the purchaser of immoveable property at a sale in execution of a decree for delivery of possession, or Art 181.
2. The appellant purchased property in execution of a decree and the sale was confirmed on 29th June, 1918. The application out of which the present appeal arises was made on 30th July, 1921. Both the District Munsif and the Subordinate Judge have held that the appellants application is barred by limitation under Article 180 of the Indian Limitation Act. It is contended by Mr. Kameswara Rao before us that an application for execution was made in June, 1920, and the District Munsif ordered that the property sold should be delivered to the purchaser and that this order was not carried out by the Court and therefore should be considered to be in force. He urges that when a Court passes an order for delivery it is the duty of the Court to see that the delivery takes place, and he relies upon the wording of Order 21, Rule 95, and contends that the words " the Court shall, on the application of the purchaser, order delivery to be made by putting such purchaser or any perso
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.