Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.74 seconds)Brahmdeo Choudhary vs Rishikesh Prasad Jaiswal & Anr on 22 January, 1997
We find that in the case in hand the appellant
is claiming its independent right over the property and
asserts its possession thereof. Order 21 Rule 101
clearly provides that all questions relating to right,
title or interest in property relevant to the
adjudication of the application, shall be dealt with
the application and not by a separate suit. The High
Court therefore, erred in refusing to hear the
appellant, on the ground that it has already filed a
suit for declaration of its title and for declaration
that the decree passed in title suit No. 8 of 1983 is
not binding on it. The provision contained under Order
21 Rule 101 CPC seems to have escaped notice of the
High Court while passing the order. We would also
like to observe that the reasoning given by the
execution Court while rejecting the application of the
appellant as indicated in the order of the High Court,
that the remedy of the appellant would only lie by
moving an application under Order 21 Rule 99 CPC is
also erroneous as in case of Brahamdeo Chaudhary'
(supra), it has been held that it should not be
insisted that possession be delivered first and the
objector may later on move the Court under Order 21
Rule 99 CPC.
Section 148 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Section 151 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
1