High Courts(1928) 01 MAD CK 0046

Adusumilli Gopalakrishnayya vs Peyyeti Gopalam and Others

Madras High Court · Decided on 5 January 1928 · Citation: AIR 1928 Mad 479(1) : (1928) ILR (Mad) 347 : (1928) 27 LW 430 : (1928) 54 MLJ 674

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

2 paragraphs · 193 words
1.

Only the power of the father to sell the shares of the sons passes to the Official Receiver [Sat Narain v. Behari Lal(1924) LR 52 IA 22 : ILR 6 Lah. 1 : 47 MLJ 857]. But the power is subject to the same qualification as it is in the father''s hands, Allahabad Bank, Ltd., Bareilly v. Bhagwan Das Johari ILR (1925) A 343 and T.S. Balavenkataseetharama Chettiar and Another Vs. The Official Receiver and Others, . In this case the sons'' shares have been attached and, after such attachment, the Official Receiver cannot exercise the power of sale. It is true that, in respect of such properties which were sold by the Official Receiver prior to the attachment of the sons'' shares by the decree-holder, the above observations do not apply. Except as to such properties, the appellant is entitled to proceed with the execution by selling the sons'' shares. He will now be allowed to execute the decree by selling the sons'' shares.

2.

The appeal is allowed with costs in this Court. The costs in the court below will be provided for by the lower court when ordering execution.