Chapter – I Introduction & Elimination Methodology 1. Introduction: The latter of a ordinance by a fitted seek conclusively determines the hues of the alloties delay appreciate to all or any of the stuffs in wrangle in the acceleration, thus creating perceptible hues in favour of the ordinance-holder. However, of-late it has been seen that instead of subjoined the stipulations and stipulations of the ordinance, adjudication-debtors bear been placing a estimate of obstacles in the way of a ordinance-holder. In unmistakablety, such a bend has grace so social that it has harsh the Supreme Seek to believe that ‘the difficulties of a adversary prepare when he has obtained a ordinance’.
Conscious of the sentiment and concern of giving pi to the ordinance and authority passed by fitted seeks, the Jurisprudence of Civil Act supplys for consummate administrations for the deterrent of ordinances. In an violate to determine that a ordinance-holder is attributeual to fabricate the utilitys out of the ordinance, the Jurisprudence of Civil Act presents a estimate of regulations for the deterrent of ordinances. One of these regulations of deterrent of ordinances is the regulation of benevolence and sale of the appropriateties of the adjudication-debtor.
Since, a ordinance holder does not by purity of the adjudication, get a just to the constitution, he cannot get the just by way of filing a acceleration but by benevolence and sale in deterrent. Era through the regulation of benevolence the seek enlightens the cosmos-people that the constitution so arrangeed to be steadfast is “in its survey” and “no true hues and liabilities should be altered”; through the regulation of sale of the appropriateties of the adjudication-debtor, the Seek diverts the currency so serene to the ordinance-holder in atonement of his pretension. However, by its very constitution constitution may be of divergent types.
Therefore, a adjudication-mortgagor may entertain either moveffectual or immoveffectual appropriateties, or twain. Thus, guardianship in appreciate the differing characteristics of these two types of appropriateties, the Jurisprudence of Civil Act prescribes divergent acts for the benevolence and sale of moveffectual and immoveffectual appropriateties. It is the endeavour of this mind to search the regulation of benevolence and sale of moveffectual and immoveffectual constitution in a currency ordinance and to intellectualize the concludes for the divergent regulation for the benevolence and sale of moveffectual and immoveffectual constitution. 2.
Research Methodology: The elimination plan subordinateenslaved by the eliminationer is middle of didactic consider of the books availeffectual at the library of the Institute of Law and to-boot that the eliminationer has to-boot enslaved the acceleration of the internet to face into some of the Interpretation of some conditions and motive of intrinsic uprightness and the eliminationer the to-boot enslaved in survey the irrelative conditions which are applicable for the elimination employment. 3. Elimination Hypothesis: • What are the stipulations subordinate which benevolence & sale of constitution graces inevitable, can it be attributeed & how it is attributeed. . Aim of Research: The aim of this mind is to perceive out why casually it graces very fur inevitable for the benevolence of constitution equable forthcoming the criticment has been plain & to search the divergent ways subordinate Jurisprudence of Civil Act which supply for sale and benevolence of constitution. 5. Mark & Limitation of Research: The mark of this mind is scant to the consider of the irrelative stipulations appreciateing benevolence and sale of constitution in deterrent of ordinances supplyd for in the Jurisprudence of Civil Procedure. Chapter – II Benevolence of Constitution . General: Exception 51 (b) empowers the seek to arrange deterrent of ordinance by benevolence and sale or by sale delayout benevolence of any constitution. The seek is fitted to unite the constitution if it is establishd delayin the persomal limits of the liability of the seek.  It is spiritual that the establish of profession of the criticment – mortgagor is beyond the liability of the seek. The theory benevolence and sale in name (b) of negativeion 51 are to be recognize disjunctively. Therefore, the benevolence of the constitution is not a name warrant.
Hence, the sale of the constitution delayout an benevolence is not unfilled or delayout liability and does not deteriorate the sale. It is just an nonconformity. An arrange of benevolence receives pi from the fellowkling it is brought to the voicelessness of the seek. Administration 54 supplys for the benevolence of immoveffectual constitution and the act for the ordinance of such benevolence. The intent of Administration 54 is to enlighten the criticment – mortgagor encircling the benevolence so that he may not remand or fruit encumbrance counteract the constitution thereafter.  The jurisprudence enumerates appropriateties to be steadfast and sold in deterrent of a ordinance. 3] Likewise, it to-boot unserene appropriateties which are not lieffectual to be steadfast or sold.  It to-boot prescribes the act wshort the identical constitution is steadfast in deterrent of ordinances by past than one seek.  The jurisprudence to-boot declares that a peculiar imbecility of constitution forthcoming benevolence is unfilled. In Ghanshyam Das v. Anant Kumar, era custom delay the stipulations of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act touching to the deterrent of ordinances and authority, the Supreme Seek had ordinary that the Civil Act Jurisprudence contains consummate and debilitating stipulations for custom delay the inquiry of deterrent of ordinances.
More unfairally, Exception 51 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act enumerates in unconcealed stipulations the irrelative regulations of deterrent of a ordinance, one amongst which is the benevolence of the constitution of the adjudication-debtor. Act enumerates in unconcealed stipulations the irrelative regulations of deterrent of a ordinance, one amongst which is the benevolence of the constitution of the adjudication-debtor. 2. Intent of Attachment: Deterrent of a ordinance receives establish by benevolence of constitution of adjudication-debtor. In unmistakablety, the benevolence of the adjudication-debtor’s constitution s the proemial tramp to the sale of constitution in deterrent chronicles and the subordinatemendacious intent of benevolence of the constitution is to present voicelessness to the adjudication-mortgagor not to ababtransfer his constitution to anyone and to-boot to the unconcealed generally-known not to forfeiture or to chaffer delay the constitution of the adjudication-mortgagor steadfast in deterrent chronicles. 3. Pi of Attachment: Exception 64 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act fabricates it plain that benevolence has just the pi of frustrateing peculiar imbecility to the pretenure of pretensions subordinate benevolence.
It conveys no distinction, attack, lien or control in favour of the uniteing claimant. In unmistakablety, in Subbarao v. Official Receiver the Andhra Pradesh High Seek era custom delay the warranted sale of the adjudication-debtor’s spiritless subordinate a ordinance of a seek, ordinary that an arrange of benevolence does not frustrate a remand by performance of law and nor does it fruit any curiosity-aid or lien. 4. Constitution which can be Attached: Exception 60 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act enumerates the appropriateties, which are lieffectual to benevolence in deterrent of a ordinance.
It declares that all saleeffectual constitution (moveffectual or unvarying) congenial to the adjudication-mortgagor or counteract which or the division of which he has a disposing liability which he may drill for his own utility may be steadfast and sold in deterrent of a ordinance despite him. Past unfairally, in Declare of Punjab v. Dina Nath, wherein the just to act at funeral ceremonies was held to be not saleable, it was ordinary by the Supreme Seek that Exception 60 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act is not debilitating and unserene non-inclusion of a feature stamp of constitution subordinate Exception 60 is accordingly, not of any coherence if it is ‘saleable’ inadequately.
However, appreciate must be had to the name to sub-exception (1) of Exception 60, which enumerates unmistakable appropriateties such as inevitable wearing habiliments, cooking vessels, beddings, tools of artisans, implements of farming, stocks of urbanists, remuneration, salaries, pensions and gratuities, warranted protections, just to advenient instrument-of-support etc. and declares that the appropriateties restricted therein are unamstrengthen from benevolence and sale in the deterrent of a ordinance. . Benevolence of Moveffectual Property: The uniteeffectual constitution congenial to the adjudication-mortgagor may be either moveffectual or immoveffectual in constitution. Rules 43 to 53 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act lay down the divergent ways in which the moveffectual constitution congenial to the adjudication mortgagor is to be steadfast guardianship in appreciate the constitution of the unserene moveffectual constitution sought to be steadfast. 1.
Attachment Of Moveffectual Constitution (Other Than Urban Produce) In Tenure Of The Judgment-Debtor: Administration 43 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act chaffers delay the regulation of benevolence of all moveffectual constitution, other than urban fruit and constitution not in the entertainion of the adjudication-debtor, for twain of which total is made in Rules 44 to 46 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Procedure.
Under Arrange 21, Administration 43, the benevolence is juridically pied singly by authentic plunder. Significantly, guardianship in survey the sundry constitution of the moveffectual appropriateties that may be steadfast subordinate this administration the Name to Arrange 21, Administration 43 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act supplys that when the constitution seized is symbolical to swift and intrinsic waning, or when the commit of guardianship it in guardianship is likely to exceed its appreciate, the uniteing dignitary may hawk it at uninterruptedly. 2.
Attachment of Debt, Portion-out & other constitution not in Tenure of Judgement – Debtor: Administration 46 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act chaffers delay the regulation of benevolence of score, element-out and other moveffectual constitution not in the entertainion of the adjudication-debtor. Subordinate Arrange 21, Administration 46 of the Civil Act Jurisprudence the benevolence of scores (other than negotieffectual tools), element-outs in a strengthening or other moveffectual constitution not in the entertainion of the adjudication-mortgagor is juridically pied by a offensive arrange, as contradistinguished from the limitation of authentic plinferior subordinate Arrange 21, Administration 43. . Benevolence of Negotieffectual Instrument: Administration 51 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act chaffers delay the regulation of benevolence of negotieffectual tools, which are neither protectioned in the seek nor in the guardianship of a generally-known dignitary. Subordinate Arrange 21, Administration 51 of the Civil Act Jurisprudence the benevolence of negotieffectual tools, which are neither protectioned in the seek nor in the guardianship of a generally-known dignitary, is juridically pied by authentic plunder.
As appreciates negotieffectual tools it does not stuff whether the negotieffectual tool is in entertainion of the adjudication-mortgagor or not. Furthermore, the authentic plinferior of the negotieffectual tool is inevitable as tshort is regularly a jeopardy that third alloties may bona fide grace entertained of the negotieffectual tool, and if a offensive arrange is held to be a weighty benevolence, they would be prepossessiond by such an arrange of which they may recognize trifle. 4.
Attachment of Hire or Allowance: Rules 48 and 48-A of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act chaffer delay the regulation of benevolence of hire of the adjudication-debtor. Subordinate Arrange 21, Rules 48 and 48-A of the Civil Act Jurisprudence the benevolence of adjudication-debtor’s hire or restitution is juridically pied by issuing a offensive voicelessness to the dispersing dignitary but if such offensive voicelessness is not served to the dispersing dignitary, the arrange of benevolence accomplish bear no pi.
Furthermore, the territorial liability is not considered in this condition, and wherever the adjudication-mortgagor is employmenting his hire can be steadfast. 5. Benevolence of Immoveffectual Property: The uniteeffectual constitution congenial to the adjudication-mortgagor may to-boot be immoveffectual in constitution. Administration 54 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act legend down the directions as to the regulation of benevolence of immoveffectual constitution, which are mandatory in constitution and not just directory.
Under Administration 54 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act the benevolence of immoveffectual constitution is juridically pied by the issuance of an arrange by the Seek prohibiting the adjudication-mortgagor from remandring or charging the constitution in any way, and all men-folks from entrance any utility from such remand or attack. Such an arrange is to be proclaimed at some establish on or close to such constitution by conquer of hammer or other ordinary regulation, and a portraiture of the arrange shall be added on a easily-seen allot of the constitution and then upon a easily-seen allot of the Court-house.
Also, wshort the constitution to be steadfast is a plant paying total to the Government, a portraiture of the arrange is to be added in the function of the Collector of the District in which the plant is establish and, wshort the constitution is plant establish in a village, to-boot in the function of the Gram Panchayat, if any, having liability counteract that village. Chapter – III Sale of Constitution 3. 1. General: A ordinance may be effected by benevolence and sale or by sale delayout benevolence of any constitution.
Sections 65 to 74 and Rules 64 to 106 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act chaffer delay the symbolical stipulations touching to sale and donation of appropriateties. 3. 2. Liability of Court: Administration 64 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act declares that any Seek executing a ordinance may arrange that any constitution steadfast by it and lieffectual to sale, or such division thereof as may look inevitable to please the ordinance, shall be sold, and that the proceeds of such sale, or a ample division thereof, shall be hired to the alloty entitled subordinate the ordinance to accept the identical.
However, it must be famous that in Desh Bandhu v. Anand, wherein the Court, era confronted delay the fellow issues of sale of appropriateties establishd beyond the territorial liability of the Executing Seek and the need of the adjudication-mortgagor to receive intention in era, it was believed that: “The engagement “may” in this administration does not discuss a wish on the Seek to arrange or dross to arrange a sale; it is indecent on it to do so when a weighty impression for such arrange and a weighty benevolence has been made. ” 3. 3.
Sale by Whom Conducted and How Made: Administration No. 65 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act enacts that full sale in deterrent of a ordinance shall be induceed by an dignitary of the Seek or by such peculiar as the Seek may arrange in this aid, in a generally-known auction. 3. 4. Ordinance of Sale: A ordinance of sale is inevitable for providing enlightenation to the intending forfeiturers. Thus, Administration 66 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act enacts that the Seek shall principle a ordinance of the adapted sale to be made in the speech of the Court.
Such a ordinance is to be drawn up forthcoming the voicelessness to the ordinance-holder and the adjudication-debtor. An absence of a voicelessness principles irremedieffectual impairment to the adjudication-mortgagor and sale delayout such a voicelessness accomplish be a nullity. 3. 4. 1. Mind of a Proclamation: It has been ordinary that a ordinance of sale is meant for the enlightenation of intending forfeiturers and not of the adjudication-debtor. However, in Narayanappa v.
Akkulappa, it was ordinary that the mind of issuing a ordinance is two-fold: (a) it defends the curiosity-behalfs of the intending forfeiturers by giving them all symbolical enlightenation appreciateing the constitution to be sold; and (b) it defends the curiosity-behalfs of the adjudication-mortgagor by facilitating the induceing of appropriate chaffer figure for his constitution and by frustrateing it truth knocked down at generally-known auction for a figure fur adown the chaffer figure. 3. 4. 2. Contents of the Proclamation:
Rule 66 (2) of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act enacts that the ordinance, which is to be drawn up shall declare the era and establish of sale, and individualize as correspondently as feasible, the subjoined features – (a) the constitution to be sold, or, wshort a allot of the constitution would be ample to please the ordinance, such allot; (b) the total assessed upon the edeclare or allot of the demesne, wshort the constitution to be sold is an curiosity-aid in an edeclare or in allot of an edeclare paying total to the Government; (c) any encumbrance to which the constitution is warranted; (d) the aggregate for the rectification of which the sale is arrangeed; and (e) full other unnaturalness which the Seek considers symbolical for a forfeiturer to recognize in arrange to critic of the constitution and appreciate of the constitution. 3. 4. 3. Regulation of making Proclamation: In arrange to defend the adjudication-debtors and for the mind of ensuring that the appropriateties of such men-folks shall not be put to sale spontaneous due generally-knownity is presentn to the unmistakablety that a sale is to be held and a appropriate turn is afforded to bidders to listen the sale forthcoming voicelessness is presentn’ Administration 67 of Arrange 21 has been incorporated in the Jurisprudence of Civil Procedure. Administration 67 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act supplys that full ordinance shall be made and published in the form prescribed by Arrange 21, Administration 54 (2) for benevolence for immoveffectual constitution, i. e. , a portraiture of it shall be added on a easily-seen allot of the constitution, and then of the Seek stock, and in the Collector’s function, in the condition of total paying plant. Also, if the Seek so directs, it shall to-boot be published in persomal Official Gazette, or in a persomal newspaper, or in twain. 3. 5. Era for Sale:
Rule 68 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act supplys that tshort shall be an meanperiod of fifteen days in the condition of immoveffectual constitution and sequable days in the condition of moveffectual constitution betwixt the period of sale and the period of affixing the portraiture of the ordinance in the Court-house. However, it should be famous that the sequable days administration does not use to a sale of accidentals symbolical to swift and intrinsic waning. 3. 6. Sale of Moveffectual Property: Rules 74 to 81 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act supply for unserene stipulations for the sale of moveffectual appropriateties. 3. 6. 1. Establish of Sale of Moveffectual Properties: Sale of all moveffectual appropriateties in deterrent of a ordinance should ordinarily be held at some establish delayin the liability of the seek arrangeing such sale. In the condition of Lakshmibai v.
Santappa, wshort unmistakable harness were steadfast in Banaras and the adjudication-mortgagor urged that they should be directed to be sold at Bombay on the conclude that they would probably induce a reform figure and it was rest by the Seek that a serene figure could be had on the defect, it was held that tshort was no amiable and ample conclude to trafficlot from the ordinary custom. 3. 6. 2. When Sale Becomes Arbitrary in Moveffectual Properties: Sub Administration 2 of Administration 77 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act enacts that the sale of a moveffectual constitution graces arbitrary as early as the forfeiture currency is hired to the dignitary or other peculiar tenure the sale and no arrange of Seek is inevitable as in the condition of the sale of immoveffectual constitution. 3. 6. 3. Sale of Urban Produce: Administration 74 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act fabricates appropriate total for the sale of urban fruit.
It supplys that in condition of urban fruit, the sale shall be held on or close the plant on which the bud is be or wshort the bud has been harvested, at or close the establish wshort the bud is mendacious. It is to-boot related to voicelessness that Sub Administration 2 of Administration 74 of Arrange 21 declares that such a sale can be postponed, if the seek feels: (i) that the serene figure is not offered; and (ii) the possessor thereof applies for such rejection. 3. 6. 4. Sale of Negotieffectual Instruments and Shares in Corporations: Administration 76 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act fabricates appropriate total for the sale of negotieffectual tools and element-outs in strengthenings.
It supplys that in condition of negotieffectual tool or a element-out in strengthening, the seek has liability to arrange sale through a broker instead of by generally-known auction. It is related to voicelessness short that this administration is singly auspicious. A seek is not frisk to remit the sale of negotieffectual tool or element-out in a strengthening through a broker. 3. 6. 5. Pi of Nonconformity on Sale of Moveffectual Property: Administration 78 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act stipulates that equable in condition of nonconformity in publishing or induceing of sale, the sale of moveeffectual constitution in deterrent ordinance cannot be said aloof. Thus, the sale does not ipso unmistakabletyo grace unfilled for conclude of transposition of stipulations touching to the sale.
However, a peculiar supported any impairment by concludes of nonconformity in the sale at the laborer of any other peculiar may sue such a peculiar for satisfaction, or, if such a peculiar is the forfeiturer, for rectification of the unserene constitution and for satisfaction in forfeit of such rectification. 3. 7. Sale of Immoveffectual Property: Rules 82 to 96 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act supply for unserene stipulations touching to the sale of immoveffectual appropriateties. 3. 7. 1. Courts Fitted to Arrange Sale: Administration 82 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act stipulates that negative the diminutive principle seek, any other seek can present the arrange of sale of immoveffectual constitution. 3. 7. 2. Rejection of Sale:
In arrange to frustrate the sale of the immoveffectual constitution of the adjudication-mortgagor in conditions wshort the ordinance can be kind by peculiar imbecility of such constitution, Administration 83 of Arrange 21 has been incorporated into the Jurisprudence of Civil Procedure. It supplys that on an impression by the adjudication-debtor, the seek in its wish may present the adjudication mortgagor some past era, to try and ababtransfer the constitution in arrange to establish the necessary some of currency. 3. 7. 3. Protection and Liquidation of Price: Administration 84 to 87 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act chaffer delay the protection and liquidation of figure in conditions of sale of immoveffectual constitution. Without-delay forthcoming the sale of immoveffectual constitution, the forfeiturer must protection 25 percent of forfeiture currency, spontaneous such limitation is traffic delay by the seek. The forfeiturer must pay the counteract of the forfeiture-currency delayin fifteen days of sale.
In condition of a need on the allot of the forfeiturer to protection the aggregate, the walk may be forfeited and renewed sale arrangeed, forthcoming the issuance of a renewed notice. Explaining the ambit and the mark of the stipulations of Rules 84 to 86 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Procedure, the Supreme Seek in the condition of Manilal Mohanlal v. Sayed Ahmed, has ordinary that: “Having searchd the speech of the applicable administrations and the juridical decisions direction upon the symbolical we are of the theory that the stipulations of the administrations requiring the protection of 25 per cent of the forfeiture-currency after a whileout-delay, on the peculiar truth plain as a forfeiturer and the liquidation of the counteract delayin 15 days of the sale are mandatory and upon non-compliance delay these stipulations tshort is no sale at all.
The administrations do not meditate that tshort can be any sale in favour of a forfeiturer delayout protectioning 25 per cent of the forfeiture-currency in the leading prompting and the counteract delayin 15 days. When tshort is no sale delayin the contemplation of these administrations, tshort can be no inquiry of symbolical nonconformity in the induce of the sale. Non-liquidation of the figure on the allot of the forfeiting forfeiturer renders the sale chronicles as a total nullity. ” 3. 7. 4. Enhancement aloof of Sale: Administration 89 to 92 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Act chaffer delay the enhancement aloof of sale. They supply that when a constitution is old in deterrent of a ordinance, an impression for enhancement aloof sale may be made subordinate these stipulations by the men-folks and on the concludes mentioned therein. 3. 7. 5. Assent of Sale:
In opposition delay the stipulations touching to the sale of moveffectual appropriateties, “no sale of immoveffectual constitution shall be end arbitrary until it is confirmed by the Court. ” Also, Administration 92 of Arrange 21 of the Jurisprudence of Civil Procedure, which chaffers delay the act for assent of sale, supplys that wshort no impression to set aloof the sale is made subordinate Rules 89, 90 or 91 or wshort such impression is made and is disallowed by the Court, the seek shall fabricate an arrange confirming the sale, and thereupon the sale shall grace arbitrary. Chapter – IV Conclusion It has been said that the difficulties of a adversary “prepare when he has obtained a ordinance.
The deterrent regulation, which commences delay the filing of an impression for deterrent, gratuity at the enforcement of a ordinance by a juridical regulation. Aware of the unmistakablety that a estimate of obstacles are establishd in the way of a ordinance-holder, who seeks to consummate his ordinance despite the constitution of the adjudication-debtor, the Jurisprudence of Civil Act supplys for consummate administrations and acts for the deterrent of ordinances. In an violate to eneffectual the ordinance-holder to fabricate the return of the ordinance passed by the fitted seek in his favour, the Jurisprudence of Civil Act allows for the benevolence and sale of the appropriateties of adjudication-mortgagor as one amongst the irrelative regulations of executing a ordinance.
However, the constitution of the appropriateties of adjudication-mortgagor lieffectual for benevolence is ordinaryly sundry. The appropriateties congenial to the adjudication-debtor, which are sought to be steadfast and sold, may be moveffectual or unvarying. Since, moveffectual and immoveffectual appropriateties by constitution bear differing hues; tshort are divergent juridical regimes controlling these two types of appropriateties, and accordingly the seek has to produce to these divergent hues and chronicles. Thus, in an violate to determine that benevolence and sale of the constitution of the adjudication-mortgagor scum a vieffectual and piive regulation of deterrent of ordinances the Jurisprudence of Civil Act has prescribed divergent acts for the benevolence and ale of moveffectual and immoveffectual appropriateties in deterrent of currency ordinances. This is best artistic in the direction of authentic plinferior of the constitution in conditions of benevolence of moveffectual constitution, as in these conditions a very authentic menace insist that the constitution capability fly the liability of seek. Chapter – V Bibliography 1. Basu’s , ‘The Jurisprudence of Civil Procedure’, Ashok Law House, New Delhi, 10th Edn. , Vol. 2, 2007. 2. Majumdar’s, ‘Commentary on the Jurisprudence of Civil Procedure, 1908’, Orient Publishing Company, 6th Edn. , Vol. 1, 2010. 3. Uprightness Nandi & Gupta Sen, ‘The Jurisprudence of Civil Procedure’, Kamal Law House, Kolkata, Vol. 1, 2009. 4. Rao’s V. J. ‘The Jurisprudence of Civil Procedure, 1908’, ALT Publication’s, 5th Edn. , Vol. 1, 2008. 5. Jain, M. P. , “The Jurisprudence of Civil Procedure”,2nd Edn. , Lexis Nexis ButterWorths Wadhwa,Nagpur. 2008. 6. Prasa, B. M. , & Sarvaria, S. k. , “Mulla The Jurisprudence Of Civil Procedure”,14th Edn. , Lexis Nexis ButterWorths Wadhwa,Nagpur, 2011. -----------------------  Raoof v. Lakshmipathi, AIR 1969 Mad 268.  Desh Bandhu v. N. L. Anand, (1994) 1 SCC 131.  S. 60(1).  Name to S. 60(1).  S. 63.  AIR 1991 SC 2251.  AIR 1965 A. P. 52  (1984) 1 SCC 137  ‘Saleable’ instrument saleeffectual by auction subordinate the authority of a Seek  (1994) 1 SCC 131  AIR 1965 A. P. 215  AIR 1964 Bom 342  AIR 1954 SC 349