9911796707
TMI Blog1936 (1) TMI 18X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ern India in liquidation is the holder of a decree against Amir Khan and Nazir Khan. In execution of that decree it attached certain property. Musammat Zamrut and Musammat Allah Rakbi, the wives of the two judgment debtors objected to the attachment on the ground that the property belonged to them. The executing Court refused to entertain these objections on the ground that the Bank' being in liqu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applied where the executing Court has passed an order contemplated by rules 60, 61 or 62, of O. XXI, Civil Procedure Code. But in the present case it is pointed out on behalf of the petitioners that no such order was passed. Although the order had the effect of disallowing the petitioners' claim it was not one under rule 61 but was one refusing to entertain the objection at all. Accordingly it is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... execution proceedings, in motion, and that section 171 Companies Act, does not preclude any person interested from defending his interests in those proceedings. For the respondent it is urged that an objection is a legal proceeding which can be separated and should be separated from other proceedings in execution, and that therefore it is one for which leave of the Court is required under secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding their property in those execution proceedings. I hold that the executing court had jurisdiction to consider the objections raised by the petitioners and that it has refused to exercise that jurisdiction. I therefore set aside its order dated February 15, 1936, and direct it to hear the petitioners objection in accordance with Rules 58 62 of O. XXI, Civil Procedure Code. Petitioners are gran ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
