Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SANDEEP V. MARNE, J
Elis Jane Quinlan and Ors. – Appellant
Versus
Naveen Kumar Seth, Director of Candica Industries – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. final order dismissing the petition while addressing urgency of execution (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. petitioners challenge the execution of a foreign decree (Para 2 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. execution proceedings initiated under section 44a after uae notified as reciprocating territory (Para 8 , 18) |
| 4. arguments presented about issues framing in execution proceedings (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 20) |
| 5. court’s observations on legal principles related to execution of foreign decrees (Para 15 , 16 , 19 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 30 , 31) |
| 6. distinction in execution procedures for reciprocating vs. non-reciprocating territories (Para 28 , 37) |
| 7. court found exceptional circumstances for framing issues in proceedings (Para 39 , 41) |
JUDGMENT
1) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Since the pleadings in the Petition are complete, the parties have requested for final hearing of the Petition. Accordingly, with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal.
2) By this Petition, Petitioners have challenged Order dated 3rd November 2022 passed by the District Judge, Pune allowing application at Exhibit 20 filed
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
