Minor Jali Basappa By Next Friend Nagamma
v.
Heerada Rudrapa And Another
(High Court Of Judicature At Madras)
Appeal Against Order No. 25 Of 1935 | 29-09-1938
There is no authority for the contention that an attachment before judgment which has come to an end with the dismissal of the suit, is restored when the suit is restored to file, in spite of an alienation of the property in the meanwhile. The case of Saranatha Ayyangar v. Muthiah Mooppanar (57 Mad. 308 [LQ/MadHC/1933/186] at p. 312 = 38 L.W. 887) cited by the learned Advocate for the appellant is expressly against him on this point.
This appeal is accordingly dismissed with costs (one set between the two respondents.)
(Leave refused).
This appeal is accordingly dismissed with costs (one set between the two respondents.)
(Leave refused).
Advocates List
For the Appellant V.S. Narasimhachar, Advocate. For the Respondents Messrs. B. Somayya, D.R. Krishna Rao, Advocates.
For Petitioner
- Shekhar Naphade
- Mahesh Agrawal
- Tarun Dua
For Respondent
- S. Vani
- B. Sunita Rao
- Sushil Kumar Pathak
Bench List
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BURN
Eq Citation
(1938) 2 MLJ 1053
1939 MWN 639
AIR 1939 MAD 167
LQ/MadHC/1938/322
HeadNote
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — S. 94 — Attachment before judgment — Restoration of, in spite of alienation of property in the meanwhile — Held, no authority for such contention — Appeal dismissed
Thank you for subscribing! Please check your inbox to opt-in.
Oh no, error happened! Please check the email address and/or try again.