Skip to content


Paras Ram Vs. Karam Singh and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty;Civil
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1887)ILR9All232
AppellantParas Ram
RespondentKaram Singh and ors.
Excerpt:
.....- order of attachment--judgment-debtor declared insolvent--appointment of receiver--vesting of insolvent's property in receiver--objection to attachment--jurisdiction to entertain objection--civil procedure lode, sections 278, 351, 354. - cantonments act[c.a. no. 41/2006]. section 346 & cantonment fund (servants rules, 1937, rules 13, 14 & 15: [h.l. gokhale, ag. cj, p.v. hardas, naresh h. patil, r.m. borde & r.m. savant, jj] jurisdiction of school tribunal constituted under maharashtra employees of private schools (conditions of service) regulations act, (3 of 1978) held, school run by the cantonment board is a primary school and it is not a school recognised by any such board comparable to the divisional board or the state board. the school tribunal constituted under section 8 of..........section 278 of the civil procedure code. if the property had been made the subject of an attachment under chapter xix of the code, the right of the objector to assert his claim to be the true owner of the property would not be ousted by the mere circumstance that the judgment-debtor had been declared insolvent, and that his property had been vested in a receiver under chapter xx. it would be the insolvent's property only, not that of the objector, that would become thus vested. the application must be entertained, and if it be found that the property in question had been attached in execution of a decree against the insolvent, the court below will have next to determine the issue of fact raised by the objector under section 278, and determine the case accordingly. the case is remanded.....
Judgment:

Brodhurst and Tyrrell, JJ.

1. The Judge was wrong in refusing to entertain the applicant's objection under Section 278 of the Civil Procedure Code. If the property had been made the subject of an attachment under Chapter XIX of the Code, the right of the objector to assert his claim to be the true owner of the property would not be ousted by the mere circumstance that the judgment-debtor had been declared insolvent, and that his property had been vested in a receiver under Chapter XX. It would be the insolvent's property only, not that of the objector, that would become thus vested. The application must be entertained, and if it be found that the property in question had been attached in execution of a decree against the insolvent, the Court below will have next to determine the issue of fact raised by the objector under Section 278, and determine the case accordingly. The case is remanded under Section 562 to be disposed of as above indicated, and the costs so far will be costs in the cause.


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