Skip to content


Behari Bharthi Vs. Bhagwan Gir and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1909)ILR31All114; 1Ind.Cas.162
AppellantBehari Bharthi
RespondentBhagwan Gir and ors.
Excerpt:
.....a decree for sale on a mortgage and also a simple money decree against the same judgment-debtor-sale in execution of combined decrees not unlawful. - 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 the maharashtra act cannot entertain appeals filed under section 9 by the employees.....richards and griffin, jj.1. it appears that the decree-holders held a mortgage decree as well as a simple money decree against the same judgment-debtors. an application was made for the attachment and sale of the mortgage property in execution of the money decree. the property was attached, but no sale took place. the decree holders then applied to sell the property in execution of the mortgage decree, which was a decree absolute for sale of the mortgaged property. while these proceedings were pending and before the sale was held, the court was asked to sell the property for the realization of the amounts of both the decrees. the property was then sold and was purchased by the appellant, who was not a party to either of the decrees. an application was then made by the judgment debtors to.....
Judgment:

Richards and Griffin, JJ.

1. It appears that the decree-holders held a mortgage decree as well as a simple money decree against the same judgment-debtors. An application was made for the attachment and sale of the mortgage property in execution of the money decree. The property was attached, but no sale took place. The decree holders then applied to sell the property in execution of the mortgage decree, which was a decree absolute for sale of the mortgaged property. While these proceedings were pending and before the sale was held, the court was asked to sell the property for the realization of the amounts of both the decrees. The property was then sold and was purchased by the appellant, who was not a party to either of the decrees. An application was then made by the judgment debtors to set aside the sale. The court below was of opinion that the sale was null and void on account of the order for sale to realize the amount of both the decrees. The court below seems to have been of opinion that the provisions of Section 99 of the Transfer of Property Act were contravened, and refused to confirm the sale, without deciding the other grounds of objection put forward by the judgment-debtors. Hence the present appeal. It seems to us that the court below did not realize that there had been a decree absolute for the sale of the mortgaged property. Section 99 of the Transfer of Property Act is as follows:

Where a mortgagee in execution of a decree for the satisfaction of any claim, whether arising under the mortgage or not, attaches the mortgaged property, he shall not be entitled to bring such property to sale otherwise than by instituting a suit under Section 67, and he may institute such suit notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, Section 43.' In the present case the decree-holder had instituted a suit under Section 67. In our opinion there was nothing irregular in selling the property for the amounts of the two decrees. Mr. Sundar Lal who appears for the respondent has been unable to cite any authority for the proposition that such sale is irregular. We allow this appeal, set aside the order of the court below, and remand the case under the provisions of Section 562 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for determination of the remaining objections. The appellant will have his costs of this appeal. Other costs will be dealt with by the court hearing the appeal.


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