Skip to content


Kothal Mammad Haji Vs. Pydal Nair and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported inAIR1916Mad833(2); 29Ind.Cas.578
AppellantKothal Mammad Haji
RespondentPydal Nair and anr.
Cases Referred and Tara Sundari Debi v. Sarada Gharan Bandopadhya
Excerpt:
.....on alienation except by way of lease--member's interest, whether attachable--civil procedure code (act v of 1908), section 60 (1)(n). - securitisation & reconstruction of financial assets & enforcement of security interest act, 2002 [c.a. no. 54/2002]section 17; power of tribunal to impose condition relating to deposit for grant of stay of auction held, there is no specific provision made under section 17 of securitisation act or under any other provisions of the said act empowering the tribunal to pass any interim order. but under sub-section (12) of section 19 of the recovery of debts due to banks and financial institutions act, 1993, the tribunal has been empowered to pass various interim orders. if sub-section (7) of section 17 of securitisation act is read.....we think that the lower appellate court has applied the authorities rightly. we need only add to them raja kamodana venlcatanarasimha ramachandra row bahadur zamindar garu v. raja lakshminarasamma bow zamindar gam 30 m.p 266 : 2 m.l.t. 188 : 17 m.l.j. 139 and tara sundari debi v. sarada gharan bandopadhya 7 ind. cas. 80 : 12 c.l.j. 146. we agree that the appellant's interest is not exempt from attachment under section 60 (n) of the code of civil procedure.it is also argued that the property cannot be attached because appellant's tarwad will have a right to object to its attachment the appellant cannot rely on this objection. it can be dealt with if the tarwad makes it.the appeal against appellate order is dismissed with costs.
Judgment:

We think that the lower Appellate Court has applied the authorities rightly. We need only add to them Raja Kamodana Venlcatanarasimha Ramachandra Row Bahadur Zamindar Garu v. Raja Lakshminarasamma Bow Zamindar Gam 30 M.P 266 : 2 M.L.T. 188 : 17 M.L.J. 139 and Tara Sundari Debi v. Sarada Gharan Bandopadhya 7 Ind. Cas. 80 : 12 C.L.J. 146. We agree that the appellant's interest is not exempt from attachment under Section 60 (n) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

It is also argued that the property cannot be attached because appellant's tarwad will have a right to object to its attachment The appellant cannot rely on this objection. It can be dealt with if the tarwad makes it.

The appeal against appellate order is dismissed with costs.


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