Mehmooda Begum vs Wasimullah Khan - 1979 Supreme(MP) 212

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: K.S. Sinha
For the Respondent: K. L. Issrani

Headnote:Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – 0.38, R. 5 – in an eviction suit plaintiff filing on application under O. 38, rule 5 CPC against the defendant – no allegation that the defendant was to dispose of the whole or any part of the property in question or was about to remove the whole or any part of their property from the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Court with intent to obstruct or delay the execution of any decree that may be passed – application not maintainable.
        Short Note
       1. This revision petition was directed against the order of the Civil Judge Class II, Bhopal rejecting the application of the petitioner – plaintiff Smt. Mehmooda Begum for proceeding against the respondents under Order 38, rule 5 CPC.
       2. Held: The application made by the petitioner plaintiff before the trial Court• was mainly concerned with having filed a suit for ejectment against the defendants in which the defendant No.1 had admitted the fact of his being her tenant at the rate of Rs. 100 per month, that he had not paid Rs. 5,100 and further rent, that she herself is a poor and old widow without any means of subsistence and that she might suffer irreparable loss in the event of the defendant – tenant leaving her premises all of a sudden. It is thus clear that there was no mention in the landlady's application that the defendant or defendants were to dispose of the whole or any part of the property Of was or were about to remove the whole or any part of their property from the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Court with intent to obstruct or delay the execution of any decree that may be passed against him or them. The only relevant allegation was that they could leave the premises at any time. That in itself was not sufficient to make out any of the grounds for granting the petitioner's relief of attaching the defendant's property before judgment. The learned Civil Judge was therefore right in dismissing the petitioner – landlady's application under Order 38, rule 5 CPC.
       Revision dismissed.