Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

1899 (2) TMI 1

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....that, if the 5 per cent, on the purchase-money and the amount specified in the proclamation of sale were not paid within the thirty days, the Court was powerless to set aside the sale. There may be circumstances in a particular case which would render such a rule quite inequitable. Nor am I prepared to say that, if the judgment-debtor has been misled by a mistake of the Court, the consequences of that mistake ought to fall upon him. I do not propose to lay down what constitutes a mistake of the Court. I confine myself to saying that there was certainly none in the present case. The question submitted must be answered in the negative. 2. We are now asked, at this late stage of the proceedings, to remand the case, in order that what actual....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e previously said. 6. The appeal must be allowed with costs. Macpherson, J. 7. I am of the same opinion. No evidence was taken in the case, but accepting as correct all the facts as stated in the respondent's petitions of the 13th and 17th December, respectively, the Court would not, in my opinion, be justified, on those facts, in setting aside the sale. Those facts certainly do not show that the appellant did all that he possibly could in order to comply with the requirements of Section 310A, and that it was due to the mistake of the Court that an insufficient amount was deposited. It is not necessary to consider in the present case, whether the case of Abdool Latif Moonshi v. Jadub Chandra Mitter I.L.R (1897) 25 Cal., 216, to....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....icant relief under Section 310A. C.H. Hill, J. 9. I also think that the questions referred to the Full Bench must be answered in the negative, and as I quite agree with what has fallen from the learned Chief Justice now, as well as generally with the reasoning on which the order of reference proceeds, I do not think it necessary to add anything. L.H. Jenkins, J. 10. I too agree as to the terms in which the questions referred to the Full Bench should be answered. In my opinion it is essential to the respondent's success that it should be established that he has been prejudiced by the act of the Court and that the mistake that has been made is attributable to that act. What constitutes an act of the Court must depend on the ci....