Skip to content


Arapayil Pattuthi Umma Vs. Thacharkavil Ummi Koya - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in5Ind.Cas.56
AppellantArapayil Pattuthi Umma
RespondentThacharkavil Ummi Koya
Cases Referred and Adhar Chandra Dass v. Lal Mohun Das
Excerpt:
attachment of decree - failure of attaching creditor to execute the attached decree--attached decree barred by limitation--bight of decree-holder to claim damages from attaching creditor--damages. - sankaran nair, j.1. the judge is wrong in holding that the plaintiff could not have executed the decree in his favour which was attached by the defendant. see patumma v. idiri beari 13 m.l.j. 265, sami pillai v. krishnasami chetti 21 m.k 417 and adhar chandra dass v. lal mohun das 1 c.w.n. 676.2. for the loss sustained by the plaintiff, by the execution of his decree being barred by limitation, the plaintiff is responsible. the decree of the lower court is reversed and the suit dismissed with costs throughout.
Judgment:

Sankaran Nair, J.

1. The Judge is wrong in holding that the plaintiff could not have executed the decree in his favour which was attached by the defendant. See Patumma v. Idiri Beari 13 M.L.J. 265, Sami Pillai v. Krishnasami Chetti 21 M.k 417 and Adhar Chandra Dass v. Lal Mohun Das 1 C.W.N. 676.

2. For the loss sustained by the plaintiff, by the execution of his decree being barred by limitation, the plaintiff is responsible. The decree of the lower Court is reversed and the suit dismissed with costs throughout.


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