Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

november 1996

Supreme Court of India · 1996-11-05

MOHD. ABDUL KHADER MOHDKASTIM & ANOTHER vs PAREETHIJ KUNJU SAYEDAHAMMED & OTHERS

Citation / case number
SC 1995/64164
Court
Supreme Court of India
Petitioner
MOHD. ABDUL KHADER MOHDKASTIM & ANOTHER
Respondent
PAREETHIJ KUNJU SAYEDAHAMMED & OTHERS
Author
SUJATA V. MANOHAR M.M. PUNCHNI
Bench
SUJATA V. MANOHAR M.M. PUNCHNI

Judgment text excerpt

The Supreme Court held that under Order 34 Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the appellant must deposit the mortgage amount of Rs. 18,000 within six months of the preliminary decree for redemption, despite the decree not specifying a time limit. The Court clarified that the absence of a time frame does not invalidate the decree, and the statutory period applies. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the High Court's decision that the preliminary decree was valid and enforceable.

MOHD. ABDUL KHADER MOHDKASTIM & ANOTHER vs PAREETHIJ KUNJU SAYEDAHAMMED & OTHERS · Niyam