CHIMANLAL HARGOVINDDAS Vs. GULAMNABI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) [here not only is the property transferred but the rights under the award are transferred, What will be the effect of that ?]

(2.) THE right under the award is not the right under a decree. THE right under an award does not open until a decree is passed. Award is an intermediate stage which is short of a decree. Further the document of transfer in this case does not purport to convey the future rights that may be obtained under the decree. In that respect the document is silent. It does not purport to transfer the decree which may be passed in future in favour of the vendor. A decree is something different from an award and what was transferred was what the vendor had already got, that is a mere award, and not the decree, which he obtained after the transfer.

(3.) UNDER Order XXI, Rule 16, the Legislature excluded the right of those who got an assignment in any way other than by the two prescribed methods, viz. assignment by writing and by operation of law. See Genaram v. Hanumcmtram (1925) 28 Bom. L. R. 761 Bhandari v. Ramackandra (1906) 17 M. L. J. 391, Mathuvapare Zamindary Co. , Ltd. v. Bhasaram Mandal (1924) I. L. R. 51 Cal. 703 and Prabhashinee Debee v. Rasiklal Banerji (1931) I. L. R. 59 Cal. 297.