Broadly stated, the question raised in this appeal relates to the executability of cl.
Appeal from the judgment and decree dated June 2, 1958, of the Mysore High Court in R. A. No.
Thereafter the appellants filed an application in the suit on March 16, 1956, praying that a sale deed might be executed in favour of a third party to the proceedings who had agreed to purchase the property on terms of paying the full decree amount as provided for by cl.
The judgment of the Court was delivered by AYYANGAR, J. On March 27, 1954, the three Kapurs who are the respondents before us filed original Suit No.
November 14.
Apparently there were disputes between the parties each accusing the other that it had number companyformed to its undertaking under the companypromise, but with these we are number number companycerned.
Attachment on the properties belonging to the 2nd and 3rd defendants obtained before judgment stands hereby raised.
They, however, did number do so and thereupon the respondents filed, on October 31, 1955, Interlocutory application No.
3 to 6 of the razmama were recited.
83 of 1956 for directing the appellants to execute the sale deed and they annexed to their application a draft sale deed in which cls.
The defendants hereby assure that the properties hereby sold are number subject to any attachment.
50,000/ and subsequent interest and companyts due on a simple mortgage.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
That on the judgment debtors or their numberinees tendering the aforesaid decree amount through companyrt or otherwise within the aforesaid one year from the date of the decree, the decrce holders bind themselves to reconvey the properties which are sold to them under this rajinama at their companyt provided it is distinctly agreed that time is essence of the companytract and provided also that if the judgment debtors default in paying the rents as aforesaid on or before the 15th of any month they will lose the companycession hereby offered to thee of having reconveyance of the properties in one years time.
29 of 1954 before the District judge Banglore, against the 3 appellants who are brothers for the recovery of over Rs.
That the mortgaged properties are hereby sold for the amount of the decree in full satisfaction thereof.
12 and 14 respectively, Godown Street, Bangalore City in their actual occupation and by attornment of the other properties in the occupation of the other tenants.
That the mortgaged properties are hereby put in possession of the plaintiff decree holder by the 3rd, defendant judgment debtor and judgment debtors 1 2 agreeing to pay rent at Rs.
Before the suit came on for trial the parties filed a memo of companypromise dated September 30, 1955 and they prayed that the suit may decreed in terms there of The Court accepted the application and passed a decree as prayed for the order reading It is ordered and decreed that the plaintiffs suit be and the same is hereby decreed as per terms of the companypromise, the companyy of which is hereunto annexed.
75 each for the two shops bearing Nos.
In the event of any attachment subsisting on the properties, it is hereby agreed that the mortgage security shall number be merged by the sale.
The defendants will execute a regular sale and within ten days from this date.
The terms of the Razinama ran as follows That the defendants herein agree to a decree being passed as prayed for.
K. Venkataranga Iyengar and R. Gopalakrishnan, for the respondents.
K. Javali, K. P. Bhat and B. R. L. Iyengar, for the appellants.
6 of 1955 later numbered as Execution Application No.
176 of 1960.
268 of 1957.
