Pandurang Laxman Satav and Ors. v. Kailash Laxman Satav and Ors. through Power of Attorney Holder, Shri Sanjay Sharad Murkute
Case brief
What is this about?
Bombay High Court, Civil Revision Application No. 143 of 2025, N. J. Jamadar J., 26 March 2025; post-decree attachment; Order XXXVIII Rule 5 CPC; Order XXXVII Rule 5; Order XXXIX Rule 5; attachment before judgment versus attachment in execution; execution proceeding; contempt of decree; partition decree 1/7 share; injunction pending partition by metes and bounds; Special Civil Suit No. 82 of 2011; RCA/644/2017; Second Appeal dismissed; Satav family property; five-week continuance of attachment; executing court not bound by impugned observations; petition disposed.
What did the court decide?
Petition stands disposed of. The respondents – plaintiffs are to file an execution proceeding or an application in the pending execution proceeding (filed by the petitioners – defendants) for execution of the decree in Special Civil Suit No.82 of 2011 and seek attachment of the properties there; until then, the District Judge's attachment order is continued for five weeks from the date of uploading of this order; if such proceeding/application is filed within one week of uploading, the learned Judge is to decide it in accordance with law within four weeks thereafter; and the learned Judge is not to be influenced by the observations in the impugned orders.