Skip to content


C. Velayudha Mudali Vs. T. Chengama Naidu and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported inAIR1942Mad727; (1942)2MLJ311
AppellantC. Velayudha Mudali
RespondentT. Chengama Naidu and anr.
Excerpt:
- .....necessarily be stayed when an order under section 20 of madras act iv of 1938 has been passed, until the disposal of a pending application under section 19. the fact that a sale held before 1st october, 1937, cannot be set aside under madras act iv of 1938 does not justify the court in going on with proceedings relating to such a sale, when all execution proceedings have been stayed. in such circumstances the order passed under order 21, rule 90 is an illegal order and it must be set aside. the lower court will be directed to dispose of the application under section 19 at once and thereafter to hold a fresh enquiry into the petition under order 21, rule 90. the appellant is entitled to costs in this appeal, payable by the decree-holder.
Judgment:

1. It seems to us clear that proceedings under Order 21, Rule 90 of the Code of Civil Procedure are proceedings in execution which must necessarily be stayed when an order under Section 20 of Madras Act IV of 1938 has been passed, until the disposal of a pending application under Section 19. The fact that a sale held before 1st October, 1937, cannot be set aside under Madras Act IV of 1938 does not justify the Court in going on with proceedings relating to such a sale, when all execution proceedings have been stayed. In such circumstances the order passed under Order 21, Rule 90 is an illegal order and it must be set aside. The lower Court will be directed to dispose of the application under Section 19 at once and thereafter to hold a fresh enquiry into the petition under Order 21, Rule 90. The appellant is entitled to costs in this appeal, payable by the decree-holder.


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