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

1960 Supreme(MP) 323

P.K.TARE
LALCHAND RAMCHAND JAIN – Appellant
Versus
KANHAIYALAL RAMBHAROSE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G.P.SINGH, M.P.Shrivastava

DIXIT, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS reference by my learned brother Tare, J. arises out of an appeal by the judgment-debtor against an order passed by the Additional District Judge, Panna, in execution proceedings of a decree. The decree under execution was drawn up on 26th October 1956 consequent to the orders pronounced by the Judicial Commissioner, Vindhya Pradesh, on 23rd December 1955 in a miscellaneous civil appeal and a civil revision. When the decree-holder filed an application for execution for recovery of costs awarded by the Judicial Commissioner the judgment-debtor-appellant raised the objection that the application was barred by time under Article 182 of the Limitation Act as it had been filed more than three years after the date of the delivery of the order viz. 23rd December 1955. This objection was overruled by the executing court which held that as the decree in the appeal was framed and signed on 26th October 1956 and the costs were taxed in the revision petition on 20th October 1956, limitation would start from these dates, and the execution application was thus within time. The judgment-debtor then appealed to this Court.

( 2 ) WHEN the appeal came up for hearing before my


















































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