Skip to content


(Pulipaty) Subbayya Vs. Kandi Subba Reddi and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported inAIR1927Mad648
Appellant(Pulipaty) Subbayya
RespondentKandi Subba Reddi and ors.
Cases Referred(vide Kunhi Moosa v. Makki
Excerpt:
- .....was raised by the agreement ex. b. nothing is said about it and if there were, it would need an application to and an order of court. next the argument as to section 61 of the code of civil procedure. no authority has been shown to me against the view taken by the learned district judge. the section appears to me to be absolute. if a sale by consent or with the connivance of the decree-holder were to be excepted the section would no doubt have said so.2. the second appeal is dismissed with costs.
Judgment:

Odgers, J.

1. It is contended that there can be a partial raising of an attachment by consent of parties outside the Court. This cannot be so; Court must raise the attachment unless it becomes inoperative by the payment of the decree debt (vide Kunhi Moosa v. Makki [1900] 23 Mad. 478 There is no force in the plea that the attachment was raised by the agreement Ex. B. Nothing is said about it and if there were, it would need an application to and an order of Court. Next the argument as to Section 61 of the Code of Civil Procedure. No authority has been shown to me against the view taken by the learned District Judge. The section appears to me to be absolute. If a sale by consent or with the connivance of the decree-holder were to be excepted the section would no doubt have said so.

2. The Second Appeal is dismissed with costs.


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