Posted On by &filed under Bombay High Court, High Court.


Bombay High Court
Kaji Inus Kaji Bapu vs Kaji Inus Kajiba on 13 July, 1906
Equivalent citations: (1906) 8 BOMLR 576
Bench: L Jenkins, K.C.I.E., Beaman


JUDGMENT

Lawrence Jenkins, K.C.I.E., C.J.

1. We are of opinion that the Courts rightly decided that the applicant was not entitled to a sale, for, we think, that Section 99 of the Transfer of Property Act is a bar.

2. But that section is no bar to an attachment.

3. We therefore think that the appellant before us is entitled to have the property attached.

4. But this prayer for attachment was not put forward until the ingenuity of Mr. Bodas in this Court discovered this point in his favour, so we cannot give him any costs.

5. We make no order as to costs of this appeal except that each party will bear his own costs; but the applicant must pay the costs of both the Courts below.

6. We send back the case to the first Court in order that an order for attachment may be made.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

66 queries in 0.101 seconds.