Skip to content


Pandharinath Sakharam Vs. Shankar Narayan Joshi - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty;Civil
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Case NumberSecond Appeal No. 738 of 1902
Judge
Reported in(1906)8BOMLR488
AppellantPandharinath Sakharam
RespondentShankar Narayan Joshi
Excerpt:
.....consequent upon the failure.; in a redemption decree, passed under the provisions of the dekkhan agriculturists relief act 1879, the subordinate judge made the decretal amount payable by instalments ; and further ordered : ' on failure to pay any two successive instalments, defendant 1 do recover the -whole amount due by sale of the mortgaged property and the deficiency if any from the plaintiffs personally.' on appeal, the high court annulled the above order and substituted in its place the following direction: 'if the sum payable under the direction aforesaid is not paid when due, then defendant no. 1 will be at liberty to apply to the court for such order as he may be entitled to under section 15 (b), sub. section 2 of the dekkhan agriculturists belief act.' - - for, what..........succeeds that direction appears to us to be contrary to the provisions of section 15 (b) of the dekkhan agriculturists' relief act xvii of 1879, and in place of that part of the decree which commences with the words ' and on failure to pay any two successive instalments &c.; ' the decree should contain the following direction :-if the sum payable under the direction aforesaid is not paid when due, then defendant no. 1 will be at liberty to apply to the court for such order as he may be entitled to under section 15 (b), sub-section 2 of the dekkhan agriculturists' relief act.2. we further direct that the first instalment be paid on the 1st january 1904 and the subsequent instalments on the 1st of january of each succeeding year.3. the appellant must pay two-thirds of respondent no. 1's.....
Judgment:

Lawrence Jenkins, K.C.I.E., C.J.

1. The only part of the decree with which we think it necessary to interfere is that which follows on the direction for payment by instalments. For, what succeeds that direction appears to us to be contrary to the provisions of Section 15 (b) of the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act XVII of 1879, and in place of that part of the decree which commences with the words ' and on failure to pay any two successive instalments &c.; ' the decree should contain the following direction :-

If the sum payable under the direction aforesaid is not paid when due, then defendant No. 1 will be at liberty to apply to the Court for such order as he may be entitled to under Section 15 (b), sub-section 2 of the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act.

2. We further direct that the first instalment be paid on the 1st January 1904 and the subsequent instalments on the 1st of January of each succeeding year.

3. The appellant must pay two-thirds of respondent No. 1's costs of this appeal.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //