Skip to content


Raman Vs. Kunhayan and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1894)ILR17Mad304
AppellantRaman
RespondentKunhayan and anr.
Excerpt:
execution - fraud in conducting a sale in contravention of agreement between creditor and debtor--estoppel of judgment--debtor by previous petition. - 1. the subordinate judge is in error in thinking that the petitioner is estopped by his previous petition no. 545 of 1891. there was no occasion for mentioning in that petition the irregularities now relied on as vitiating the sale, as that petition was filed for the purpose of obtaining an adjournment with a view to raising the money by private arrangement. in a similar case the calcutta high court also held that omissions in such a petition did not create an estoppel i.l.r. 7 cal. 613 we set aside the order and direct the subordinate judge to allow the parties to adduce evidence with reference to the alleged irregularities and to dispose of the case in accordance with law. the costs of this appeal will abide and follow the result.
Judgment:

1. The Subordinate Judge is in error in thinking that the petitioner is estopped by his previous petition No. 545 of 1891. There was no occasion for mentioning in that petition the irregularities now relied on as vitiating the sale, as that petition was filed for the purpose of obtaining an adjournment with a view to raising the money by private arrangement. In a similar case the Calcutta High Court also held that omissions in such a petition did not create an estoppel I.L.R. 7 Cal. 613 We set aside the order and direct the Subordinate Judge to allow the parties to adduce evidence with reference to the alleged irregularities and to dispose of the case in accordance with law. The costs of this appeal will abide and follow the result.


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