Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.23 seconds)
Documents citing Bangaru Chettiar vs San Basha Sahib And Anr. on 30 April, 1976

Govindaswami Padayachi vs Arumugha Padayachi on 7 January, 1988

12. Since great reliance had been placed on the decision of the Full Bench in Bangani Chettiar's case, 89 L.W.310, referred to above, it becomes necessary to refer to it though on going through the decision, it appears to me that it is clearly distinguishable on facts, and so far as the present case is concerned, it does not seem to be much relevant except to the extent that it decides that even though the judgment debtor does not apply within 60 days from the date of obtaining an order under Section 20, his right under Section 19 is not lost and he can still make an application under Section 19.
Madras High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Arumugha Gounder vs Kannammal And Anr. on 26 July, 1978

3. C.M.S.A. No. 184 of 1974 arises out of the dismissal of the judgment-debtor's application under Section 23-C Mr. N. Srinivasan, learned Counsel for the judgment-debtor, was unable to any in what manner the dismissal of the application was not in accordance with the law. The sale, admittedly, was hold on 13th June, 1973, subsequent to the publication of the amendment Act VIII of 1973 on 24th January, 1973. Hence, on the basis of the ruling in Bangaru Chettiar v. Son Basha Sahib and Anr. . the application was clearly not maintainable under Section 23-C of the Act. C.M.S.A. No. 184 of 1974 must, therefore, be dismissed.
Madras High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1