<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2006 (4) TMI 582 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306852</link>
    <description>In execution proceedings, an alleged compromise, waiver or out-of-court adjustment cannot be recognised as satisfaction of a decree unless it is certified or recorded under Order XXI Rule 2 CPC. Section 47 gives the executing court jurisdiction over questions of execution, discharge and satisfaction, but that general power yields to the special procedure governing payment or adjustment by consent. On the facts, the alleged arrangement was conditional, the contemplated sale deed was not executed, and no certificate of adjustment was obtained, so the decree remained executable and the High Court&#039;s contrary order was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Mar 2023 17:21:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=706188" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (4) TMI 582 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306852</link>
      <description>In execution proceedings, an alleged compromise, waiver or out-of-court adjustment cannot be recognised as satisfaction of a decree unless it is certified or recorded under Order XXI Rule 2 CPC. Section 47 gives the executing court jurisdiction over questions of execution, discharge and satisfaction, but that general power yields to the special procedure governing payment or adjustment by consent. On the facts, the alleged arrangement was conditional, the contemplated sale deed was not executed, and no certificate of adjustment was obtained, so the decree remained executable and the High Court&#039;s contrary order was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306852</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>