N SRIRAMAMURTHI Vs. N SOORAMMA
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Click here to view full judgement.
Reddy, C.J. -
(1.) The problem that falls to be solved in this appeal is whether Section 48 CPC is subject to Section 6 of the Indian Limitation Act.
(2.) The facts necessary for the present enquiry are not in dispute and lie in a narrow compass. A minor, whose legal repreentative is the first respondent herein, obtained a decree against one Sarabharaju in O.S. No. 338 of 1952 on the file of the District Munsifs Court, Kakinada, on 29-11-1935. Execution of this decree was taken out by the guardian of the minor on 12-11-1938 but the petition was dismissed as infructuous on 16-2-1939. The minor attained majority on 5-7-1949. Two years threreafter, i.e., on 31-10-1951, he filed another petition (E.P. No. 5 of 1953).
(3.) The judgment-debtor resisted the petition on the ground that it was barred under Section 48 CPC. The decree-holder invoked Section 6 of the Limitation Act for extending the period of limitation envisaged by Section 48 CPC. However, the objection raised by the judgment-debtor based on Section 48 found acceptance with the executing Court with the result that the execution petition was dismissed.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.