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

2000 Supreme(MP) 208

R.S.GARG
Manoj Kumar Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Mahadev Prasad – Respondent


Advocates:
P. Divakar for applicant;
N.K. Patel for non-applicant No. 1

ORDER

1. By this petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure the applicant/objector seeks to challenge the correctness, validity and propriety of the order dated 10.5.99 and 19.7.99 passed by the learned 6th Civil Judge, Class I, Jabalpur in execution case No. 176-A/82, whereby the applicant's right to lead evidence has been closed.

2. The facts in nut-shell are that the applicant-decree holder filed a civil suit somewhere in the year 1974 weeking possession of the property in dispute against the non-applicant No.2. The suit was decreed in favour of the present decree holder but during the pendency of the suit, somewhere in the year 1991, the present applicant purchased the property. When the decree was put into execution the present applicant/objector resisted the delivery of possession and submitted his objections inter-alia pleading that as he was a bona fide purchaser for consideration without notice, the decree could not be executed against him. It appears that the trial Court was moved by the application and permitted the present applicant to lead evidence in support of his objections. Number of the opportunities were given to the applicant but as he failed to lea






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