LawMirror.com

Results of execution of decree

Andriod Application iphone Application

Showing : 61-70 of 1823 Results

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2025
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 21, Rule 11(2) -- Execution - Decree holder himself need not make an application for getting decree executed - Same may be moved by some other person proved to satisfaction of Court who is well acquainted with facts of case and application contains in a tabular form, the particulars enumerated in O.21.R.11(2) Clauses (a) to Clause (j)...........

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2025
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 21, Rule 11(2) -- Execution - Signing and verification of execution application cannot be equated with that of verification of pleading as mandated U.O.6.R.15 CPC - Application for execution of decree can be moved by signing and verifying either by decree holder or by some other person proved to satisfaction of Court to be acquainted with..........

JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2025
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 47 -- Execution - Objections - All questions that arise between parties to suit in which the decree was passed or their representatives and relating to execution, discharge or satisfaction of decree have to be determined by Executing Court - No separate suit can be filed to determine these questions...........

JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2025
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 47, 50 -- Execution - Objections - JDs claimed that suit property has come to their hands not in their capacity as Lrs but in their independent capacity being male lineal descendants of protected tenant - Said claim raised by JDs therefore, required to be determined by Executing Court as this is a question which relates to execution,..........

ORISSA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2025
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 21, Rule 11 -- Execution - Money decree - Executing Court dropped the execution proceedings on the ground of technicality, without providing any opportunity to petitioner to supply required particulars of properties indicated in application for execution in compliance with provisions of O.21.R.11(2) CPC - Impugned order not sustainable -..........

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Year of decision: 2025
Details

Agreement to sell -- Plaintiff inducted only because of agreement to sell - Relief of specific performance denied to plaintiff - However, plaintiff was compensated for Rs.2 crores and directed to hand over possession to defendant - Plaintiff has been unnecessarily delaying and causing obstruction in execution of decree - He has no locus or justification to hold on to..........

ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2025
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 21, Rule 58 -- Execution - Money decree - Claim petitioner sought to resist execution relying on an unregistered non-possessory agreement executed subsequent to attachment, would not confer any right, title or interest to claim petitioner in suit property to resist execution - Claim petition rightly rejected...........

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2025
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 21, Rule 32 -- Execution - Decree for permanent prohibitory injunction - Violation of decree - When a decree for permanent prohibitory injunction is violated and JDs forcibly took possession of DH's property by violating decree, JDs may be expelled by Executing Court by exercising powers U.O.21.R.32 CPC - It would not be necessary for DH..........

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2025
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 21, Rule 32(5) -- Execution - Decree for injunction - Disobedience of a decree of injunction is necessary for seeking restitution U.O.21.R.32(5)...........

PUNJAB AND HARAYANA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2025
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 151, Order 21, Rule 32 -- Execution - Decree for injunction restraining defendant from interfering with use and possession of plaintiffs - Application U.O.21.R.32 CPC is vague, as no details of interference in possession of plaintiffs were given - Executing Court allowed the application without properly appreciating the controversy -..........

Showing : 61-70 of 1823 Results