Skip to content


Minor Narayanan Chetti and anr. Vs. Panchanathan Chettiar and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported in(1939)2MLJ758
AppellantMinor Narayanan Chetti and anr.
RespondentPanchanathan Chettiar and ors.
Cases ReferredRamsewak Prasad v. Saran Singh
Excerpt:
- - their father was the sole decree-holder, and although the sons may well have been entitled along with him to the benefits of the decree a thing which has yet to be investigated -it is impossible to say that they were, or are 'decree-holders'.the decree has been transferred to them by operation of law on the death of their father and order 21, rule 16 of the code of civil procedure is applicable......case of ramsewak prasad v. saran singh : air1937pat607 . the decision of the learned district judge on this point is in our opinion correct. this appeal is accordingly dismissed with.....
Judgment:

1. We cannot accept the contention on behalf of the appellants, that they are decree-holders who can execute the decree without recognition by the Court which passed the decree of the devolution upon them of the decree. The appellants are not 'decree-holders' as defined in Section 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Their father was the sole decree-holder, and although the sons may well have been entitled along with him to the benefits of the decree a thing which has yet to be investigated - it is impossible to say that they were, or are 'decree-holders'. The decree has been transferred to them by operation of law on the death of their father and Order 21, Rule 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure is applicable. With respect we are not able to agree with the learned Judge who decided the case of Ramsewak Prasad v. Saran Singh : AIR1937Pat607 . The decision of the learned District Judge on this point is in our opinion correct. This appeal is accordingly dismissed with costs.


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