shown as the 1st respondent in the Appeal is the only contesting respondent/Decree-holder/plaintiff. It is brought to my notice that the Food ... schedule rice mill. It is stated that the Decree-holder-Food Corporation of India filed E.P. No. 25/2002 for attachment and sale
Collector having perused the records found that the compromise decree, or for that matter the decree, obtained by the parties does not bind the Government ... made pursuant to the said decree adversely affected their rights. The Joint Collector further found that none of the contesting parties in the said suit
report from the Trial Court.
39. Accordingly, the judgment and decree dated 6.2.1980 passed in OS No. 8 of 1979 by the Dist. Judge, Visakhapatnam ... following order;
"...Ordered that the appeal is allowed on contest. The judgment and decree of the learned trial Court is set aside. The case
money, the office drafted the decree as a preliminary decree in a mortgage suit and therefore the decree is to be corrected in exercise ... years and 4 months after passing of the decree and that too when the decree is getting time barred for the purpose of execution
Principal Junior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam, which, after contest, was decreed on 7.1,1999 and that decree has become final and in spite of that decree
That the petitioners herein have contested all the time. After passing final decree the Counsel for the petitioners have obtained the copies of the final
decision on each of them, is not a judgment and a decree in the eye of law. In the decision referred in Aziz Ahmed Khan ... superior Court, whether it be a consent decree or ex parte or a decree passed after contest, can be always impeached on the ground
aside to give an opportunity to contest the matter on merits.
3. Contesting the application, it is submitted by the respondent that in spite ... opportunity through proper application to contest the proceedings. Surprisingly, the entire process is unusually hastened by an ex parte decree on the next
Principal Junior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam, which, after contest, was decreed on 7.1.1999 and that decree has become final and inspite of that decree the respondent
follows:
First respondent - decree holder obtained a money decree against second respondent -judgment debtor. During the pendency of suit, the decree holder attached before judgment ... raise the attachment in question. The claim application was contested by the first respondent - decree holder on various grounds. Both parties adduced evidence before Executing
