MENTE SUBBA RAO Vs. PENMETSA VENKATARAJU
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
MENTE SUBBA RAO
Click here to view full judgement.
Chandra Reddy, J. -
(1.) The subject-matter of these appeals and the parties are the same. Therefore, all the appeals could be dealt with together. The facts leading to these appeals lie in a narrow compass and could be stated as follows:
(2.) The appellant in C. M. A, Nos. 90 and 91 of 1963, who is the first respondent In C. M. A. No. 178 of 1963, brought a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 6,845/- and odd against the first respondent in the first two appeals and six others impleaded as pro forma defendants in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Narsapur and obtained a decree as prayed for. When the decree-holder put his decree in execution, the judgment-debtor carried the matter in appeal to the High Court and moved for stay of execution of the decree, and, as a condition to the grant of stay, he deposited costs of the decree sand a security bond Was executed by himself, his sons end wife for the due performance of the decree In question. The security bond imposed a personal liability and also hypothecated eight items of property. The decree of the Subordinate Judges Court was finally confirmed by the High Court and the judgment-debtors appeal was dismissed.
(3.) Thereafter, the decree-holder, i.e., the appellant in C. M. A. Nos. 90 and 91 of 1962, filed E. A. No. 47 of 1960 under Section 145 and Order 21, Rule 64 C. P. C. to enforce the security given by the judgment-debtor, his sons and wife to sell the property and realise the decree debt.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.