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

1919 Supreme(Mad) 354

OLDFIELD
Veyindramuthu Pillai – Appellant
Versus
Maya Nadan – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Oldfield, J.

1. The opinion of the Full Bench has established that Section 47, C.P.C. is applicable to these proceedings. It is however objected further that they are covered also by Order XXI, Rule 103 and that in accordance with it in the absence of a suit the order of the Lower Court is conclusive. It is to be observed that the reference to " any party " in the rule is to any party to the petition, not to the decree under execution. This is clear in view of the form of the provisions in the previous Code and the division of the former Section 335 into two parts, of which the present rule represents the second. The expression " any party " being interpreted in the manner suggested, there is no reason for holding as has been held in connection with the similar claim petition procedure that the rule excludes the application of Section 47 to cases, such as the present, between parties or their representatives.

2. To turn next to the merits, the material facts are that the appellant is or represents the purchaser at a Court sale held in execution of a money decree. After this attachment but before the sale a suit was instituted on a mortgage of the properties sold and was pendi









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