Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Rajesh Bindal, Vijay Bishnoi, JJ
Gajanan – Appellant
Versus
Pralhad – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of trial and appellate court background leading to execution proceedings. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. high court and counsel arguments regarding limitation and the impact of dismissal of appeal. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. whether appeal dismissal resets limitation for execution under article 136 of limitation act. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 4. rationale for avoiding hypertechnicality and preventing parties from benefiting from their own wrong. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
VIJAY BISHNOI, J.
Leave Granted.
2.
The present appeal has been preferred by the Appellant (“Decree Holder”) challenging the judgment dated 03.02.2025 (hereinafter referred to as “impugned judgment”) passed in Writ Petition No. 565 of 2024 by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench (hereinafter referred to as “the High Court”) wherein the High Court allowed the writ petition filed by the Respondent (“Judgment Debtor”) and set aside the order dated 31.10.2023 passed by the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division, Motala (hereinafter referred to as “Executing Court”), whereby the execution application filed by the Decree Holder Signature Not Verified D A
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
