Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

A petition for execution of an arbitral award for recover of money by attachment and sale of immovable property of the Judgment Debtor at Delhi is filed at New Delhi though the objections against the arbitral award were dismissed by the Court at Ludhiana and without seeking transfer from the Court. Would the execution petition be maintainable?

A petition for execution of an arbitral award for recover of money by attachment and sale of immovable property of the Judgment Debtor at Delhi is filed at New Delhi though the objections against the arbitral award were dismissed by the Court at Ludhiana and without seeking transfer from the Court. Would the execution petition be maintainable? Correct Answer Yes

Related Questions

A', on 9th January, 2015 agrees to sell his immovable property to 'R' and out of the total sale consideration of Rs. 3,00,000/- receives a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- from 'B' as advance payment and agrees to vacate the property and handover vacant peaceful physical possession thereof to 'B' and to execute the Sale Deed of the property in favour of 'B' on receipt of balance sale 'consideration' on or before 9th July, 2015. 'A' fails to vacate the property or to execute the Sale Deed or to deliver possession of the property to 'B'. 'B' after waiting patiently till 31st January, 2016, on 1st February, 2016 got issued a legal notice to 'A' to take the balance sale consideration and execute the Sale Deed and deliver vacant peaceful physical possession. 'A' vide his reply received by 'B' on 17th February, 2016 denies the agreement. The limitation of three years available to 'B' for instituting a suit for specific performance is:
A decree was passed by Court P. It was sent to Court Q for execution. Decree holder approached Court R and requested it to execute it. Court R appointed a receiver. It was challenged by the judgment-debtor in an appellate court. Will the appellate court agree with the judgment-debtor?
A, a bank officer, got compulsorily retired in 2014. Since the bank authorities did not release the leave encashment in his favour, he filed writ petition WP 2001 (W) of 2017 in Ranchi High Court for the same and also for the interest on the unpaid amount. The writ petition was disposed of by a learned Single Judge in December 2018 directing the bank to release the privileged leave encashment benefits to the petitioner to the extent he was entitled to in accordance with law within a certain period. The prayer for interest was not specifically denied by the court. The bank filed an appeal against the order. The Division Bench of Ranchi High Court in February, 2019 declined to admit the appeal. The bank authorities released the leave encashment in favour of the petitioner. However, A files a writ petition again for a direction to the bank to disburse interest to A at the rate of 18% per annum on leave encashment released by the bank. This petition is covered under which of the following?
Two friends X and Y are traveling from Jaipur to Ludhiana, which is 550 km apart. Traveling at a certain speed, X takes 2.5 hrs less than Y to reach Ludhiana. If X increases his speed by 5 km/hr, he will take 10/3 hrs less than Y to reach Ludhiana. At what speed (in km/hr) was, person X driving from Jaipur to Ludhiana?
"If the writ petition under Article 226 in a High Court is dismissed on the merits (i.e. dismissed in limine); but because of laches of the party applying for the writ or because it is held that the party had an alternative remedy available to it, then dismissal of writ petition (under Article 226) would not constitute a bar to a subsequent petition under Article 32." This principle was laid down by Supreme Court in:
A decree was transferred for its execution from Court X to Court Y. Court Y is of the opinion that Court X committed an error when it calculated the limitation period. Court Y announced that it rectified the mistake of Court X and upheld the rule of law by pronouncing judgment in favour of judgment debtor. This was challenged by the decree holder in the appellate court. Predict whether the decree holder will win the case.
Where a judgment debtor puts any resistance or obstruction to the decree holder in exemption of a decree for possession of immovable property, the judgment debtor is liable, under section 74 of Code of Civil Procedure, to be:
The defendant had filed a complaint to the Magistrate against the plaintiff. The complaint was dismissed. The defendant moved the Sessions Judge in appeal. He got himself examined in Sessions trial although he knew the charge was false and he was acting without reasonable and probable cause. His complaint was dismissed by the Session Judge. Thereupon the plaintiff filed a suit for malicious prosecution against the defendant.
In the aforesaid case, which one of the following conclusion in correct?
A judgment-debtor is arrested in execution of a decree for the payment of money and the Judgment-debtor pays the amount of the decree and the costs of the arrest to the officer arresting him, such officer-
A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court passes judgment in a matter. In a later case before a high court, a party presents the Supreme Court judgment as a binding authority. The opposing party claims that the high court is not bound by the Supreme Court's judgment because relevant provisions of law were not brought to the notice of the Supreme Court in that case. Which of the following is most correct in this case?
Principle: Article 141 of the Constitution provides that the law declared by the Supreme Court is binding on all courts within the territory of India.