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

1977 Supreme(MP) 129

J.P.BAJPAI
RAJIVLOCHAN CHHALO MISHRA – Appellant
Versus
GANGARAM LAKHISINGH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S.C.Pandey,

JUDGMENT :

( 1. ) THE short point involved in this revision relates to the question about the commencement of limitation for an application for execution in a case where the decree directing delivery of possession to one party is conditional on payment of certain amount by the party seeking possession to the other side, who is already in possession and when the decree does not fix any time limit for making the payment.

( 2. ) IT was not disputed that the decree sought to be executed by the applicants was on the following terms:

(i) That on payment of a sum of Rs. 2,000 by the applicants to the non-applicants, the applicants will be entitled to get back possession of the suit land from the non-applicants by executing the decree;

(ii) No time limit was fixed for making such payment. The decree was passed on a compromise between the parties therein there was nothing in the terms so as to fix any period for making the aforesaid payment.

( 3. ) MORE than 12 years after the date of the decree, the applicants tendered and deposited the required sum of Rs. 2,000 for payment to the non-applicants and applied for being placed in possession in execution of the said decree. The executing Court ea










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