Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.20 seconds)Krishnaji Ramchandra Koshti vs Bhikchand Ramkaran Marwadi on 12 February, 1941
4. This aspect of the matter may not be altogether free from difficulty and the point whether, on partition, there is really any assignment, may not be altogether free from controversy. We do not, however, think that it is necessary for us, for purposes of this case, to go Into that question, as, in our view, the present matter would be covered by Order 22, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as it is now well established that the said rule applies to execution proceedings, (vide Krishnaji Ramchandra Koshti v. Bhikchand Ramkaran Marwadi, ILR 1941 Bom 629 = (AIR 1942 Bom 82); Manmohan Dayal v. Kailash Nath, ; Mahimuddin v. Panu Sahani.
Mahimuddin vs Panu Sahani And Ors. on 28 August, 1951
4. This aspect of the matter may not be altogether free from difficulty and the point whether, on partition, there is really any assignment, may not be altogether free from controversy. We do not, however, think that it is necessary for us, for purposes of this case, to go Into that question, as, in our view, the present matter would be covered by Order 22, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as it is now well established that the said rule applies to execution proceedings, (vide Krishnaji Ramchandra Koshti v. Bhikchand Ramkaran Marwadi, ILR 1941 Bom 629 = (AIR 1942 Bom 82); Manmohan Dayal v. Kailash Nath, ; Mahimuddin v. Panu Sahani.
Section 146 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Manmohan Dayal And Ors. vs Kailash Nath And Ors. on 9 May, 1957
4. This aspect of the matter may not be altogether free from difficulty and the point whether, on partition, there is really any assignment, may not be altogether free from controversy. We do not, however, think that it is necessary for us, for purposes of this case, to go Into that question, as, in our view, the present matter would be covered by Order 22, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as it is now well established that the said rule applies to execution proceedings, (vide Krishnaji Ramchandra Koshti v. Bhikchand Ramkaran Marwadi, ILR 1941 Bom 629 = (AIR 1942 Bom 82); Manmohan Dayal v. Kailash Nath, ; Mahimuddin v. Panu Sahani.
Hem Chandra Banerji vs Annapurna Debi on 26 June, 1931
It is true that, in an earlier Bench decision of this Court, some doubt was expressed on the point (vide Hem Chandra Banerjee v. Annapurna Debi, 36 Cal WN 93 = (AIR 1932 Cal 423); but the same cannot prevail against the above preponderance of judicial authority. On an examination of the relevant statute also, namely, the Code of Civil Procedure, we are ourselves of the opinion that the said statutory provision (Order 22, Rule 10) will apply to execution proceedings, as it is not excluded by the excepting or excluding rule (Order 22, Rule 12).
1