Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.39 seconds)

Thattantavita Alias Thattante Kandom ... vs Puthalathad Kandi Kombi Aliassan And ... on 25 April, 1919

339 and by the Madras High Court in Vachali Rohini v. Kombi Aliassan (1918) I.L.R. 42 Mad. 753 is to be preferred to the view taken by those Courts in the earlier decisions referred to in those cases. On the wording of the Article no doubt it may appear as if it would apply also to the case of a judgment-debtor dispossessed of immoveable property; and it is urged on behalf of the respondent before us that Article 166 which follows Article 165 has been interpreted as governing the case of an application by a judgment-debtor to set aside a sale in execution of a decree. It is clear that the considerations applicable to Article 166 are different. And we are not concerned in this appeal with the scope of Article 166. I do not desire to suggest for a moment that Article 166 would not apply to the case of an application by a judgment-debtor to set aside a sale in execution of a decree. But the wording of Article 165 is somewhat different and is capable of being read in a restricted sense, in which it has been read by the Allahabad and Madras High Courts in the cases to which I have already referred. I think that that is the view which we should give effect to in this appeal.
Madras High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 4 - Full Document
1