Skip to content


Barrow Vs. Javerchund Sett - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectLimitation;Civil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1896)ILR19Mad67
AppellantBarrow
RespondentJaverchund Sett
Excerpt:
limitation act - act xv of 1877, section 14, schedule ii, article 179--exclusion of time of proceeding bona fide in court without jurisdiction--step in aid of execution--application for sanction to an agreement to give time to a judgment--debtor. - - 1. even if the period during which the application was pending in the madras court of small causes should be excluded under section 14 of the limitation act, the application of 26th february 1889, being one for sanctioning the agreement to give time for payment, and not for execution of the decree, was clearly not a step in aid of execution;1. even if the period during which the application was pending in the madras court of small causes should be excluded under section 14 of the limitation act, the application of 26th february 1889, being one for sanctioning the agreement to give time for payment, and not for execution of the decree, was clearly not a step in aid of execution; the subsequent application is, therefore, barred.2. we must, therefore, allow this appeal and restore the order of the subordinate judge. under the circumstances, we make no order as to costs of this appeal.
Judgment:

1. Even if the period during which the application was pending in the Madras Court of Small Causes should be excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, the application of 26th February 1889, being one for sanctioning the agreement to give time for payment, and not for execution of the decree, was clearly not a step in aid of execution; the subsequent application is, therefore, barred.

2. We must, therefore, allow this appeal and restore the order of the Subordinate Judge. Under the circumstances, we make no order as to costs of this appeal.


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