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

1924 Supreme(Mad) 287

K.SASTRI
Peruri Sooryaprakasam – Appellant
Versus
P. I. Muniswami Chetti – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Kumaraswami Sastri, J.

1. This is an application by the sureties praying that they may be given two months time to pay the amount of the decree, which they are liable to pay as sureties and that execution may be stayed for two months, in order to enable them to pay the amount.

2. The suit was filed under Order 6-A of the Original Side Rules against the defendant and leave to defend was given, on condition that the defendant gave security. The applicants stood as sureties, A decree was ultimately passed and execution is now sought against the sureties.

3. The affidavit of Chandrasekhara Chatty (one of the sureties), filed in support of the application, states that the defendant has been promising to settle the claim with the plaintiff and pay up the decree amount and the sureties therefore did not take any steps to find the money, that ten days before the filing of the present application notice was issued to the sureties to show cause why execution should not be issued against them, that the judgment-debtor is still promising to find the amount due, that the sureties are persons possessing property, but that owing to the suddenness with which the application against them has




















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