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

1973 Supreme(All) 10

HARISWARUP
Chandrawati – Appellant
Versus
Kallu – Respondent


Advocates:
H.C. Rastogi, for Applicant; I. N. Misra and S.N. Pandey, for Respondents.

ORDER :- This revision has been filed against the appellate order and proceedings arising out of an application under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside the order of sale made under Section 2 of the Partition Act.

2. A suit for partition of a house was filed. The plaintiff applied that as the house was too small to be partitioned it should be sold and proceeds distributed under Section 2 of the Partition Act. The Munsif on that application directed the sale of the house and the house was sold in auction. Smt. Chandravati the present applicant, purchased the property. On coming to know of the sale the defendants applied under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside the order of sale. Learned Munsif dismissed the application holding that the application was not maintainable as preliminary and final decrees had already been passed in the case. The defendants went up in appeal. The learned District Judge reversed the finding of the trial Court, held that the application was maintainable and set aside the order of sale as well as the sale itself and directed the cancellation of the sale certificate. Against that order the auction p





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