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

1958 Supreme(Ori) 29

S.BARMAN
GOUR NAG BHUSAN – Appellant
Versus
ANANTA SENDH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
N.Kr.Das, N.MUKHARJI

S. BARMAN, J.

( 1 ) THESE applications for revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure are directed against an order of the 2nd Munsif, Cuttack, restoring Misc. Cases nos, 210 and 239 of 1954 which were dismissed for non-prosecution. The learned munsif heard these petitions under the provisions of Order 9, Rule 9 read with section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code.

( 2 ) THE relevant facts, so far as necessary for the present purpose, are shortly these: The petitioner in the present revision petitions was an auction-purchaser of properties in Execution Case No. 286 of 1952 in the Court of the Munsif, Second court, Cuttack. The opposite parties Nos. 1, 2 and 3 (hereinafter referred to as lis pendens purchasers) filed objections under Order 21, Rule 58 of the Code of Civil procedure on the ground that they were purchasers during the pendency of the original suit and the said objections were dismissed. Thereafter, the lis pendens purchasers made an application being Misc. Case No. 239 of 1954, under Order 21, Rule 100 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying to be put in possession of the disputed properties and they also made an application, being misc. C







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