Case Details

Citation(s)
1962 SLG 449 1962 SLD 449 1962 PLD 119
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 29-D of 1960, decided (at Dacca) on Ist March 1962.
S. A. RAHMAN, FAZLE-AKBAR, R. Z. KALKAUS AND HAMOODUR RAHMAN, JJ
M. K. Roy Senior Advocate Supreme Court (A. S. M. Mafakhar Advocate Supreme Court with him) Instructed by S. M. Abbass Attorney for Appellant. A. B. Mahmud Hossain Senior Advocate Supreme Court (Md. Jani Alam Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed b

MOHIUDDIN MOLLA---Appellant

VS

(1) THE PROVINCE OF EAST PAKISTAN, (2) ABDUS SOBHAN AND (3) KETAB ALI--Respondents

Law:

Section:

(a) Attachment----Inherent jurisdiction of Court to attach property, even before execution application is competent-Court's power to preserve property for benefit of decree-holder-(Installments decree)-Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 51 (b), O. XXI, r. 57 and O. XXXVIII, r. 5. In case of an instalment decree, where the very first instalment had not yet fallen due, so that an execution applica­tion was not competent, and the -debtor, in the mean­time, had entered into an agreement with a third party to sell his property: Held, that the Court had inherent jurisdiction to preserve the property of the -debtor 1n order that ft may be available for realization of the decretal amount. This principle has been recognised in Order XXXVII1, rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 which empowers the Court to attach the property of the Defendant in order that any decree that is passed in the suit may be satisfied by sale of the attached property. If the Court has power to attach the property of the defendant at a time when there Is only a possibility of a decree in favour of the plaintiff it will be anomalous to hold that after he has actually secured a decree the Court cannot act to protect his interests just because the execution of the decree has been postponed. The jurisdiction of the Court to attach the property of the defendant truly arises from the fact that the Court has power to grant relief. A power to grant relief necessarily implies power to take all such steps as may be needed to ensure the grant of relief to the plaintiff. Full relief is not granted to a plaintiff by a paper decree. It is only when the decree is satisfied that he gets full relief and the Court has power to pass all such orders as may be required for the satisfaction of the decree unless any such order be expressly or by necessary implication prohibited. Order XXXVIII, rule 5 should be regarded as a provision which recognizes a power rather than a provision which confers a power. The Civil Procedure Code, generally speaking does not create new powers but regulates the exercise of power already possessed by the Court. Even before the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 was enacted the Civil Court…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492