Back
P. B. BALAJI
R. Karuppannan – Appellant
Versus
Natarajan (Deceased) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(P.B. Balaji, J.)
(Prayer: The Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree dated 17.07.2017 passed in A.S.No.24 of 2015 on the file of the Principal Sub-Court, Salem, confirming the judgment and decree dated 27.10.2014 made in R.E.A.No.137 of 2004 in R.E.P.No.126 of 2002 in O.S.No.193 of 2002 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Salem.)
This Second Appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 17.07.2017 passed in A.S.No.24 of 2015 on the file of the Principal Sub-Court, Salem, confirming the judgment and decree dated 27.10.2014 made in R.E.A.No.137 of 2004 in R.E.P.No.126 of 2002 in O.S.No.193 of 2002 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Salem.
2. The Second Appeal proceedings arise from a suit for recovery of money filed by one N.Gunasekaran, as plaintiff, in O.S.No.193 of 2002 against one K.R.Jagadeesan, on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Salem. The suit was filed for recovery of a sum of Rs.29,025/- based on a promissory note executed by the defendant in the said suit, namely K.R.Jagadeesan. The suit came to be decreed on 26.04.2002. The defendant remained expart
The court established that non-compliance with procedural requirements for attachment before judgment renders the attachment ineffective, impacting the validity of subsequent sales, including court a....
A purchaser of property after an attachment order stands as a representative of the judgment-debtor; consequently, all challenges to the court auction must be adjudicated by the executing court under....
A claim under Order 38 Rule 10 of C.P.C is maintainable after the suit is decreed, and the attachment before judgment continues after the decree, adjudicable under Order 21 Rule 58 of C.P.C.
Attachment must comply with jurisdictional rules; absence qualifies as an irregularity, not an automatic nullity unless substantial injury is proven.
A decree established in a suit under Order XXI does not automatically nullify an execution sale where necessary parties are not included, reaffirming the principles of execution law.
The main legal point established is that property conveyed to a Defendant's wife can be attached to satisfy a decree if the conveyance was done to evade execution, and legal heirs are liable to satis....
whether Section 35 of the Act is mandatory or directory the sale held in violation of the said provision is only illegal but not a nullity and therefore, it can be set aside only in the manner and th....
Collusive transfer to defeat creditor voidable under execution proceedings despite preceding attachment if lacking bona fides.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
