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

1923 Supreme(All) 32

KANHAIYA LAL, WALSH
Muhammad Iftikharullah – Appellant
Versus
Banke Lal – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. This appeal arises out of an application made by the decree-holder-respondent for the recovery of certain costs awarded to him by an appellate decree of this Court from the person of the judgment-debtors. It appears that the decree-holder obtained a preliminary decree for the sale of certain-property against the present judgment-debtors and other persons which provided that, in the case of non-payment of the decretal money, including the costs awarded by the Trial Court, the mortgaged property was to be sold. From that decree some of the heirs of the original mortgagor appealed to this Court. Their appeal was unsuccessful, and was dismissed excepting so far that the time for the payment of the money was extended; and the decree -holder-respondent was awarded his costs as against them. The effect of the dismissal of the appeal with the modification mentioned above was that the decree of the Trial Court, as amended, merged into the decree of this Court, and until it was made final it could not be executed against the mortgaged property. The decree-holder sought in the present proceedings to recover the costs awarded to him by the decree of the Appellate Court, but Order XX

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