Dismissed

Mrs. Maria Celesta Lucia Cecilia Cota Viegas and 6 Ors., v. Shri Hubert Correia and 7 Ors.

Bombay HC15 Oct 2013AO/24/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge dismissed an appeal challenging the rejection of an injunction application. The court held that since a decree was passed against the respondents, the appellants should have challenged the attachment of property under Order XXI Rule 97 CrPC or Section 47 CrPC, making the injunction appeal bereft of merit.

What did the court decide?

The appeal filed to set aside the rejection of the injunction application is dismissed.

Mrs. Maria Celesta Lucia Cecilia Cota Viegas and 6… — Execution and Attachment | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

¶2

APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 24 OF 2013

¶3

MRS. MARIA CELESTA LUCIA CECILIA COTA VIEGAS AND 6 ORS., ... Appellants Versus SHRI HUBERT CORREIA AND 7 ORS., ... Respondents

¶4

Mr. Joseph Vaz, Advocate for the appellants.

¶5

Coram:R. M. SAVANT, J.

¶6

Date:15th October, 2013

¶7

P.C.

¶8

The above Appeal challenges the order dated 09/11/2011 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, 'A' Court, Margao, by which order, the application filed by the applicants in the suit for injunction restraining the defendants no.1 to 7 from interfering with the possession of the plaintiff in respect of the suit property, came to be rejected.

¶9

It appears that the suit property in question has been attached

¶10

in the execution proceedings filed for execution of decree passed in Regular Civil Suit No.284/1989/C in which suit, a money decree in the sum of Rs.29,760/- was passed against the defendants. The said decree has become final and binding. The plaintiffs in the suit filed an application for execution bearing Execution Application No.26/1992/A. In the said Execution Application, the Decree Holder filed an application for attachment of the property being House No.23 and garden area which is surveyed under Chalta No.29 of P.T. Sheet

¶11

¶12

No.189 of City Survey, Margao. The order of attachment, accordingly, came to be passed. The appellants herein filed an application under Order XXI, Rule 58 of the C.P.C. for lifting the said attachment on the ground that the Judgment Debtors have nothing to do with the property, which is attached and it is the appellants, who have right over the said property. The said application filed by the appellants came to be rejected by the Executing Court by the order dated 27/09/2010 and the order dated 08/07/2010 attaching the property, came to be confirmed. The appellants, thereafter, filed the instant suit in question for the relief claimed which is mentioned hereinabove. The Trial Court, in the aforesaid conspectus of facts, rejected the application filed by the appellants for temporary injunction.

¶13

In my view, the order passed by the Trial Court cannot be taken exception to having regard to the fact that the execution has been filed pursuant to the decree, which has been passed in the said Regular Civil Suit No.284/1989. If the appellants wanted to assert the right, if any, which they had to the attached property, the same ought to have been done by them by having recourse to Order XXI, Rule 97 of the C.P.C. or Section 47 of the C.P.C.. In my view, therefore, no fault can be found with the impugned order. The Appeal from Order is therefore bereft of merit and is accordingly dismissed.

¶14

R. M. SAVANT, J.

¶15

¶16

SMA

Mrs. Maria Celesta Lucia Cecilia Cota Viegas and 6 Ors., v. Shri Hubert Correia and 7 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. Maria Celesta Lucia Cecilia Cota Viegas and 6 Ors., v. Shri Hubert Correia and 7 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Uday Babuli Chari Vs Shri Jaganath Pai Bir (Deceased) through Lr'S and Ors.

The Vasco Urban Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd., Vs Gomantak Mazdoor Sangh Rep. by Its General Secretary Shri. Puti Gaonkar and 12 Ors.

Mrs. Rupali Ravji Gawas and Anr., Vs Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority, through Its the Member Secretary

Mr. Ranaditya S. Banerjee Vs Mr.Somnath Sarkar

Mrs. Maria Celesta Lucia Cecilia Cota Viegas and 6 Ors., Vs Shri Hubert Correia and 7 Ors.

M/S. Sai Samrudhi Developers and 2 Ors., Vs Shri Ashok Yeshwant Gaonkar and 22 Ors.