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

1984 Supreme(Ori) 74

R.C.PATNAIK
MAYADHAR BHOI – Appellant
Versus
MOTI DIBYA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.K.Mohapatra, Ganeswar Rath, P.K.RATH, R.Ch.Mohanty, Ramakanta Mohanty

R. C. PATNAIK, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision is directed against an order passed by the Munsif, Ist. Court, Cuttack, rejecting the objection of the judgment-debtors to the issue of Warrant of arrest under Order 21, Rule 37 of the Civil P. C.

( 2 ) THE opposite party obtained a money decree against the petitioners and their father Uchhab, and levied execution thereof in Execution Case No, 26 of 1982. Uchhab expired during the pendency of the proceeding. No substitution was made. The execution proceeded against the petitioners. At this stage, a few relevant facts be noted. Despite service of notice the judgment-debtors did not appear. So, the decree-holder took steps for issue of notice to show cause why warrants of arrest should not be issued against the judgment debtors. The Court rejected the prayer of the decree-holder being of the view that the application was lacking in requisite averments warranting action under Order 21, Rule 37 of the Civil P. C. (for short, 'the Code' ). On 8-3-1983 the decree-holder filed a fresh petition with affidavit, for reconsideration of the matter. On 18-3-1983, the Court directed issue of notice to the judgment-debtors under Order 21, Rule 37 of the Cod














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