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

1930 Supreme(Mad) 168

CURGENVEN
P. Abdul Samad Saheb – Appellant
Versus
Sowcar Kamaruddin Saheb And Ors. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Curgenven, J.

1. This appeal arises out of execution proceedings under a consent decree awarding the decree-holder the sum of Rs. 5,845-10-8 to be realized out of the assets of one Nur Muhamad Usman Saheb, deceased, in the hands of the defendants and out of the assets in their hands of the business in which he was a partner. Of the defendants, the first and second were surviving partners, while the third was the widow of the aforesaid Nur Muhamad Usman Saheb. The earliest execution application to which we have been referred was to transfer the decree to the Sub-Court of Shimoga, and this was ordered on 7th December 1927. Then while execution was pending there, on 24th February 1928, the decree-holder assigned the decree to the present appellant. In E.P. 146 of 1928 this transferee decree-holder applied under Order 21, Rule 16, Civil P.C., for leave to execute the decree and to continue the proceedings at Shimoga. This was ordered on 19th April 1928, the order reciting that the defendants did not appear in person or by pleader, though served with a copy of the notice of the application. Subsequently, on 1st September 1928, defendant 3 died and in E.P. No. 21 of 1929 the appel


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