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

april 2014

Supreme Court of India · 2014-04-11

Annapurna vs Mallikarjun & Anr

Citation / case number
AIRONLINE 2014 SC 507
Court
Supreme Court of India
Petitioner
Annapurna
Respondent
Mallikarjun & Anr
Author
Shiva Kirti Singh
Bench
Shiva Kirti Singh, Anil R. Dave

Judgment text excerpt

The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in remitting the matter back to the Executing Court without considering the mandatory provisions of Order XXI Rule 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) and Article 127 of the Limitation Act, 1963, which require an application to set aside a sale to be filed within 60 days along with the necessary deposit. The Court emphasized that the Executing Court had no discretion to entertain the application in the absence of such deposit. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the High Court's order was set aside.

Annapurna vs Mallikarjun & Anr · Niyam