https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458274 The court addressed the execution of a money decree through the attachment of properties, finding that the decree-holder had suppressed crucial facts by not disclosing the payment of the decretal amount under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court deemed this an abuse of process, imposing costs on the decree-holder, to be deposited with the Advocates Welfare Trust and the judgment-debtor's counsel. The execution petition was deemed satisfied contingent upon the decree-holder's compliance with the cost directive, with the possibility of re-listing for further action if the costs were not deposited within the specified timeframe. en-us Thu, 14 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:52:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458274 The court addressed the execution of a money decree through the attachment of properties, finding that the decree-holder had suppressed crucial facts by not disclosing the payment of the decretal amount under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court deemed this an abuse of process, imposing costs on the decree-holder, to be deposited with the Advocates Welfare Trust and the judgment-debtor's counsel. The execution petition was deemed satisfied contingent upon the decree-holder's compliance with the cost directive, with the possibility of re-listing for further action if the costs were not deposited within the specified timeframe. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 14 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458274