Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.18 seconds)

West Bengal Essential Commodities ... vs Swadesh Agro Farming And Storage Pvt. ... on 14 September, 1999

"The position is well settled that ordinarily a decree becomes enforceable immediately after the judgment is pronounced. However, there may be situations when a decree may not be enforceable on the date it is passed. Usually this situation arises where in the decree itself the right of the decree-holder depends on happening of certain event or on fulfillment of certain other conditions by the parties in the case or by an external agency, under any provision of law. This position has been clarified in the case of W.B. Essential Commodities Supply Corpn. Vs. Swadesh Agro Farming & Storage Pvt. Ltd. and Another (1999) 8 SCC. Therein this Court repelling the impression that a decree becomes enforceable only when it is drawn up and signed, observed:
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 51 - S S Quadri - Full Document

Sri Chandra Mouli Deva vs Kumar Binoya Nand Singh And Ors. on 12 December, 1975

In this view of the matter, the High Courts of Patna and Calcutta in Chandra Mouli Deva v. Kumar Binoya Nand Singh (AIR 1976 Pat 208) and Sunderlal & Sons v. Yagendra Nath Singh (AIR 1976 Cal 471) have correctly laid down the law; the opinion to the contra expressed by the High Court of Calcutta in Ram Krishna Tarafdar v. nemai Krishna Tarafdar (AIR 1974 Cal 173) is wrong. Section 5 of the Limitation Act has no application; Section 12(2) of the Limitation Act is also inapplicable to an execution petition. If the time is reckoned not from the date of the decree but from the date when it is prepared, it would amount to doing violence to the provisions of the Limitation Act as well as of Order 20 and Order 21 Rule 11 CPC which is clearly impermissible."
Patna High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 10 - Full Document

Sunderlal And Sons vs Yagendra Nath Singh And Anr. on 4 February, 1976

In this view of the matter, the High Courts of Patna and Calcutta in Chandra Mouli Deva v. Kumar Binoya Nand Singh (AIR 1976 Pat 208) and Sunderlal & Sons v. Yagendra Nath Singh (AIR 1976 Cal 471) have correctly laid down the law; the opinion to the contra expressed by the High Court of Calcutta in Ram Krishna Tarafdar v. nemai Krishna Tarafdar (AIR 1974 Cal 173) is wrong. Section 5 of the Limitation Act has no application; Section 12(2) of the Limitation Act is also inapplicable to an execution petition. If the time is reckoned not from the date of the decree but from the date when it is prepared, it would amount to doing violence to the provisions of the Limitation Act as well as of Order 20 and Order 21 Rule 11 CPC which is clearly impermissible."
Calcutta High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 15 - S Mukharji - Full Document
1