SRINIVASAN
Gnanambal – Appellant
Versus
Perumal Pillai – Respondent
1. There is no merit in this revision petition. The first respondent filed the suit O.S.No.87 of 1968 on the file of Sub Court, Cuddalore, and obtained a decree on 6.8.1969 against the petitioner and the second respondent. That was challenged in Appeal and it was confirmed on 16.11.1970 by the dismissal of the appeal. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a suit O.S.No.194 of 1972 for setting aside the decree and for restraining the decree-holder from executing the decree. Injunction was granted during the pendency of the suit stopping execution. Ultimately, the suit was dismissed. An appeal was filed against it in A.S.No.34 of 1975 which was dismissed on 30.8.1978. The matter was brought to this Court in S.A.No.531 of 1979 which was dismissed on 30.10.1983. Thus, the decree holder was not in a position to execute the decree from 6.8.1969 to 30.10.1985.
2. Apart from that, the petitioner claimed benefits of the Debt Relief Acts 4 of 1938, 10 of 1975 and 15 of 1976. She got also an order of stay of execution proceedings from 19.11.1974 onwards. The moratorium was in force for 4 years and 9 days. If that period is added to the period of 12 years normally allowed for execution t
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.