Gorrijala Venkayya and ors. Vs. Pothigunta Laxmiah and ors.

Gorrijala Venkayya and ors. vs Pothigunta Laxmiah and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Mar 25, 1912

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/809239

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/809239
Court: Chennai
Judge: Abdur Rahim and ;Sundara Aiyar, JJ.
Decided On: Mar 25, 1912
Subject: Civil

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Civil Procedure Code (Act V of 1908), Order XXI, Rule 53, Clause (6) - Whether applies to attachment of decrees before judgment. -

Key legal issue: Civil

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Gorrijala Venkayya and ors.

Respondent

Pothigunta Laxmiah and ors.

Legal References

Reported In: 14Ind.Cas.285

Excerpt

civil procedure code (act v of 1908), order xxi, rule 53, clause (6) - whether applies to attachment of decrees before judgment. - 1. the first question argued in this appeal is that an inquiry ought to have been made whether the judgment-debtor had notice of the attachment or not; but no such question was raised before the lower court. the next question that is argued is that order xxi, rule 55, clause 6, does not apply to cases where the attachment was made before judgment. we de not find any sufficient reason for excluding from the operation of this rule cases of attachment before judgment. the appeal is dismissed.

Full Judgment

1. The first question argued in this appeal is that an inquiry ought to have been made whether the judgment-debtor had notice of the attachment or not; but no such question was raised before the lower Court. The next question that is argued is that Order XXI, Rule 55, Clause 6, does not apply to cases where the attachment was made before judgment. We de not find any sufficient reason for excluding from the operation of this rule cases of attachment before judgment. The appeal is dismissed.

Same Parties Gorrijala Venkayya and ors. vs Pothigunta Laxmiah and ors. Same Subject Civil Same Judge Abdur Rahim and ;Sundara Aiyar, JJ.

Civil