9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Validity of the order directing the decree-holder to take out a fresh attachment for sale of property after the dismissal of the previous execution case. Analysis: The case involved a situation where a property belonging to the judgment-debtor was attached and subsequently sold in execution of a decree. However, the sale was set aside, and the Court ordered the decree-holder to take further steps for sale within a specified time frame. When the decree-holder failed to take any steps within the given time, the Court recorded an order dismissing the case. Subsequently, the decree-holder sought to proceed with the sale by requesting a proclamation, but the judgment-debtor objected, claiming to have made partial payment. The Court then directed the decree-holder to obtain a fresh attachment before proceeding with the sale. The decree-holder appealed this order to the High Court. The High Court disagreed with the lower court's view that the attachment automatically ceased to exist due to the dismissal of the execution case for failure to take timely steps for the sale of the attached property. The High Court referenced the principle established by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, emphasizing that the mere failure to proceed with the sale within the specified time does not nullify all previous actions, including the attachment. The High Court concluded that the intention was not to invalidate the attachment and start afresh but to discontinue the execution due to the decree-holder's inaction. Therefore, the High Court set aside the order directing a fresh attachment and instructed the lower court to issue a sale proclamation upon a proper application by the decree-holder. The costs were awarded to the appellant in both courts.
|
