Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.55 seconds)
(Singanamala) Venkataswamy vs (Pese) Venkataramana Rao And Ors. on 8 August, 1934 cites

Sudarsan Poddar vs Manindra Chandra Pal on 27 November, 1930

3. Section 60, dealing with attachment, mentioning certain specific kinds of property liable to attachment and sale in execution of a decree, includes in the list "all other saleable property, moveable or immoveable, belonging to the judgment-debtor etc." and ends with the proviso that certain properties mentioned in the various clauses to the proviso shall not be sold. A decree of a Court is not one of the properties which is exempted in the proviso. The appellant contends that reading these provisions of law together, a preliminary decree for partition can be attached under Order 21, Rule 53 and that though "decrees" are not expressly mentioned in Section 60 as property liable to attachment and sale they nevertheless fall within the expression "all other saleable property" which occurs in that section and can therefore be sold by force of that section and Order 21, Rule 64 which deals with sale generally of attached decrees. This argument is supported by the decisions in Sudarsan Poddar v. Manindra Chandra Pal 1932 Cal.
Calcutta High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1