https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292737 A mortgage decree obtained under the repealed Transfer of Property Act was treated as carrying a vested right of direct execution, so later Code of Civil Procedure procedure under Order XXXIV did not displace the earlier execution right. For limitation, the executable decree was assessed with reference to the court of first instance and Article 182, not Article 181. A purchaser pendente lite was bound by the proceedings, and his payment application was treated as an acknowledgment of liability, with the payment and acknowledgment operating to affect limitation. On that basis, the execution application was held not time-barred and the execution petition was restored for disposal according to law. en-us Thu, 25 Mar 1920 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Jan 2021 13:21:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292737 A mortgage decree obtained under the repealed Transfer of Property Act was treated as carrying a vested right of direct execution, so later Code of Civil Procedure procedure under Order XXXIV did not displace the earlier execution right. For limitation, the executable decree was assessed with reference to the court of first instance and Article 182, not Article 181. A purchaser pendente lite was bound by the proceedings, and his payment application was treated as an acknowledgment of liability, with the payment and acknowledgment operating to affect limitation. On that basis, the execution application was held not time-barred and the execution petition was restored for disposal according to law. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 25 Mar 1920 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292737