Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.32 seconds)
Documents citing Ram Autar Sahu And Ors. vs B. Bate Krishna And Anr. on 18 February, 1936

Alliance Bank Of Simla Ltd. vs F.B. Powel on 9 September, 1938

3. The authority of this case was followed in the later case in Ram Autar Sahu v. Bate Krishna (1936) 23 A.I.R. All. 479 in which the learned Judges of this Court held that an auction-purchaser purchasing property at a sale in execution of a simple money decree against a judgment-debtor whose property has been ordered to be sold in a mortgage suit, is a representative of the judgment-debtor within the meaning of Section 47.
Allahabad High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Prem Narain Aggarwal vs Basheshar Dass And Ors. on 26 October, 1970

(49) Counsel for respondents I to 4 raised one other point also which deserves to be noticed. He argued that the executing court had held that the appellant was to be deemed to be a party to the proceedings in the partition suit and was a representative of the judgment-debtors. Under sub-Section (3) of Section 47 that question had to be determined by the executing court. It was held in Ram Autar Sahu and others v. B. Bate Krishna and another that a decision by the court executing a decree that certain persons are the representatives of the judgment-debtors is a decision under Section 47 and is a decree against which an appeal lies. In that the question before the Court was whether a revision application lay from such an order and it was held that such an application did not lie We fail to see how a separate suit can be maintained against such a decision when no appeal was filed against that order. This is yet another ground in support of the contention regarding non-maintainability of the suit.
Delhi High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sabbir Ahmad And Others vs Additional District Judge And Others on 4 February, 2011

Their Lordships of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Ram Autar Sahu and others vs. B. Bate Krishna and another AIR 1936 Allahabad 479 laid down that persons taking a subsequent mortgage during the pendency of the suit on the mortgagee are representatives of the said mortgagee (judgment-debtor) within the meaning of Section 47 of C.P.C. and can be impleaded as party in the execution proceedings.
Allahabad High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 1 - P Mithal - Full Document
1