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

1953 Supreme(All) 19

MALIK, MUKERJI
RAMJI DAS – Appellant
Versus
S. MOHAMMAD LAIQ – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
AKHTAR HUSSAIN, S.C.Das

MALIK, CJ.

( 1 ) THESE two appeals have been filed on behalf of the decree-holders against the order of the learned Single Judge by which he allowed two execution appsals pending in this Court.

( 2 ) IN the year 1929, one Mir Muzaffar Husain had borrowed some money on the basis of a promissory note. A suit for the recovery of the money was filed and a decree obtained on 17-11-1931 for a sum of Rs. 765/4/- plus costs and interest. On 21-1-1932 Mir Muzaffar Husain died leaving 12 persens as heirs and legal representatives. In August 1932, the decree-holders filed an application for execution and for bringing the names of the legal representatives of the deceased judgment-debtor on the record. This application was granted but ultimately the execution application was not proceeded with and it was consigned to the record room. This order is dated 22-12-1932. On 13-7-1935 a second application for execution was filed but as the judgment-debtors were agriculturists, this application also could not be procesded with and was consigned to the record room. A third application filed on 13-7-1938 met with the same fate on the same ground and the papers were consigned to the record room on 11-2-1












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