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

1996 Supreme(MP) 207

S.C.PANDEY
MOHD. YOUSUF – Appellant
Versus
JYOTSANA BEN – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.K.Pathak, RAVISH CHANDRA AGARWAL

S. C. PANDEY, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal against he order dated 12-1-90 filed by the objectors der Order 21, Rule 58 (4) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The 1st Additional District Judge to the Court of District Judge, Satha, has rejected the application under Order 21, Rule 58 of the Code of Civil Procedure registered as M. J. C. No. 26/88. This appeal is filed under Order 21, Rule 58 (4) of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 96 of the Code.

( 2 ) THE respondents 1 to 4 were the decree holders who filed Execution Case No. 47/79 against the judgment-debtor Mohd. Ahsan Bux. It is alleged in the application under Order 21, Rule 58, filed by the appellants, that the property in question known as 'chandani Talkies', shown as House No. 190/ 1125 Purana Ward No. 11, Satna in the Municipal records, was not liable to attachment. It was alleged inter alia that same property was sold to the appellants by a registered sale deed dated 5-10-70 pursuant to an attachment for recovery of Income-tax dues against the judgment-debtor. The appellants stated that they purchased the attached property after obtaining permission of the Income-tax Officer. They stated that they had deposited Rs.



















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