Idumba Parayan – Appellant
Versus
Pethi Reddi – Respondent
1. The application for execution arose out of a partition decree. Some of the members of the family sued their coparceners for partition and sought to set aside certain alienations in favour of strangers. The decree gave the plaintiffs their share : The Court found, that the alienation impeached was binding upon the members of the family to the extent of about Rs. 800 and odd and directed that the plaintiffs do obtain possession of the property in the possession of the alienees after paying a sum of Rs. 400 and odd. in terms and in effect, this portion of the decree was one for redemption. The final decree does not however say that in case the money is not paid within the time fixed viz., 10-7-1916 the suit for possession of the property shall stand dismissed. Nor does it say that the right to recover possession on subsequent payment is barred to the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs did not pay the amount within the time stipulated. They subsequently applied for possession of the property after paying into Court the amount which was ordered to be paid. The Courts below have held that as the money was not paid within the time fixed the plaintiffs are not entitled to any further ex
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.