JUGAL CHARAN MONDAL JUDGMENT DEBTOR Vs. PANKAJINI DASI DECREE HOLDER
LAWS(CAL)-1960-2-4
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on February 04,1960

JUGAL CHARAN MONDAL, JUDGMENT-DEBTOR Appellant
VERSUS
PANKAJINI DASI, DECREE-HOLDER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

P.N. Mookerjee, J. - (1.) This is a judgment-debtor's appeal, arising oat of a proceeding under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The appellant judgment-debtor, who was also the Receiver to the judgment-debtor's estate, objected to the holding of the sale, upon the ground, inter alia, that the Court which made the relevant order for sale, or, more precisely, made the order, directing issue of sale proclamation, and fixed the date of sale, had no jurisdiction to pass the relevant order or orders, and had also no jurisdiction to hold the sale at the time, or, in the manner, in which the same was held. The objection was overruled by both the Courts below and the sale has since been actually held and the property has been purchased by the decree-holder respondent.
(2.) The relevant facts stand as follows : On June 1, 1955, the respondent decree-holder obtained the decree in Question for Rs. 2178/-, with interest Rs. 81-2-0 and costs Rs. 297-11-6, in Money Suit No. 144 of 1954, from Sri K. K. Chakravarty, the learned Munsif, 1st Court, Alipore, who had pecuniary jurisdiction up to Rs. 3500/-. On February 27, 1956, the aforesaid decree was put into execution before the same Court and the same learned Judge, having pecuniary jurisdiction as aforesaid, and the order for sale was made by the said learned Judge through the following processes, namely, (a) by directing issue of writ of attachment on March 17, 1956, the attachment being duly effected in the first week of April following; (b) by issuing or directing issue of notice under Order XXI Rule 66 of the Code of Civil Procedure, on May 29, 1956, the notice being duly served on June 4, 1956; and (c) by settling and issuing or directing issue of sale proclamation on June 15, 1956, which was duly served in time.
(3.) On August 11, 1956, the appellant filed an objection under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure on the ground inter alia that necessary leave to proceed against him as receiver, as aforesaid, had not been obtained by the decree-holder. This was registered as Miscellaneous Case No. 211 of 1956 (Section 47) and the same was adjourned from time to time until September 28, 1956, when the execution proceedings were stayed by the Court, that is, by the same learned Judge, Sri K. K. Chakravarty, until the disposal of the above Misc. case, which had, in the meantime been fixed for peremptory hearing on December 1, 1956. The latter date, however, appears to have been shifted later on to December 10, 1956.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.