Skip to main content

Section 145 CPC - Code of Civil Procedure - Enforcement of liability of surety.

 Section 145 CPC Description

Where any person 1[has furnished security or given a guarantee]-


(a) for the performance of any decree or any part thereof, or


(b) for the restitution of any property taken in execution of a decree, or


(c) for the payment of any money, or for the fulfilment of any condition imposed on any person, under an Order of the Court in any suit or in any proceeding consequent thereon,


2[the decree or Order may be executed in the manner therein provided for the execution of decree, namely :-


(i) if he has rendered himself personally liable, against him to that extent;


(ii) if he has furnished any property as security, by sale of such property to the extent of the security;


(iii) if the case falls both under clauses (i) and (ii) then to the extent specified in those clauses,


and such person shall, be deemed to be a party within the meaning of section 47 :]


Provided that such notice as the Court in each case thinks sufficient has been given to the surety.


STATE AMENDMENT


Uttar Pradesh-Substitute the following for section 145;


"145. Where any person has become liable as surety or given any property as security:


(a) for the performance of any decree or any part thereof, or


(b) for the restitution of any property taken in execution of any decree, or


(c) for the payment of any money or for the fulfilment of any condition imposed on any person, under an Order of the Court in any suit or in any proceeding consequent there on, the decree or Order may be executed in the manner herein provided for the execution of decrees:-


(i) if he has rendered himself personally liable, against him to that extent; and


(ii) if he has given any property as security, by sale of such property to the extent of the security;


and such person shall, for the purposes of appeal, be deemed to be a party within the meaning of section 47:


Provided that such notice as the Court in each case thinks sufficient has been given to the surety.


Explanation:-For the purposes of this section a person entrusted by a Court with custody of any property attached in execution of any decree or Order shall be deemed to have become liable as surety for the restitution of such property within the meaning of clause (b)."


[Vide U.P. Act No. 24 of 1954, sec. 2 (w.e.f. 30-11-1954)].


1. Subs. by Act 104 of 1976, sec. 49 for "has become liable as surety" (w.e.f. 1-2-1977).


2. Subs. by Act 104 of 1976, sec. 49 for certain words (w.e.f. 1-2-1977).


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more