Skip to content


Kallu Khan Vs. Abdullah Khan and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1920)ILR42All394
AppellantKallu Khan
RespondentAbdullah Khan and anr.
Excerpt:
execution of decree - attachment--failure of custodian appointed by court to restore property to judgment-debtor when so ordered--remedy of judgment-debtor. - - 1. the order complained of in this case was passed wholly without jurisdiction. if kallu khan misappropriated the crops, the .remedy of the judgment-debtor was to sue him for recovery of the crops or their value, or to bring a suit, for damages against him, but the court in proceedings like those set forth above, had no power to make a decree as it purports to have done against kallu khan, the man to whom the crops where entrusted......in execution of the decree some crops were attached and were placed in charge of the applicant, kallu khan. on the 27th of april, 1919, the judgment-debtor, abdullah khan, presented an application to the court in which he stated that, although he had paid a part of the decretal amount and the court had ordered the attached crops to be released, those crops had not been delivered back to him. an explanation was called for from the amin and on receipt of it, the court instituted certain proceedings and examined witnesses and in the end 'made an order on the 2nd of june, 1919, directing the applicant to hand over certain crops to the judgment-debtor or pay him rs. 106, their price. there is no authority to justify the action of the court. if kallu khan misappropriated the crops, the.....
Judgment:

Pramada Charan Banerji, J.

1. The order complained of in this case was passed wholly without jurisdiction. What happened was this. A decree was obtained against Abdullah Khan by Bashir Khan on the 25th of February, 1919. He applied for execution of the decree on the 13th of March, 1919. The judgment-debtor, paid apportion of the decretal amount and obtained time to pay up the balance and the case was struck off in April, 1919. In execution of the decree some crops were attached and were placed in charge of the applicant, Kallu Khan. On the 27th of April, 1919, the judgment-debtor, Abdullah Khan, presented an application to the court in which he stated that, although he had paid a part of the decretal amount and the court had ordered the attached crops to be released, those crops had not been delivered back to him. An explanation was called for from the amin and on receipt of it, the court instituted certain proceedings and examined witnesses and in the end 'made an order on the 2nd of June, 1919, directing the applicant to hand over certain crops to the judgment-debtor or pay him Rs. 106, their price. There is no authority to justify the action of the Court. If Kallu Khan misappropriated the crops, the .remedy of the judgment-debtor was to sue him for recovery of the crops or their value, or to bring a suit, for damages against him, but the Court in proceedings like those set forth above, had no power to make a decree as it purports to have done against Kallu Khan, the man to whom the crops where entrusted. I accordingly grant the application and set aside the order of the court below. I make no order as to costs.


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