SIR BINOD MITTER, SIR GEORGE LOWNDES, VISCOUNT DUNEDIN
GUDIVADA MANGAMMA – Appellant
Versus
MADDI MAHALAKSHMAMMA – Respondent
Judgement
Petition for special leave to appeal from a decree of the High Court at Madras (November 1, 1928), reversing a decree of a Subordinate Judge.
The petitioner was plaintiff in a suit against the respondent, his sister, for a declaration of his title to, and for possession of, property which had belonged to their deceased mother. The property included certain promissory notes payable by persons not parties to the suit. For purposes of Court fees the suit was valued at Rs.7200.
The Subordinate Judge decreed the suit, but upon appeal to the High Court it was dismissed.
An application by the petitioner to the High Court for a certificate enabling an appeal to the Privy Council was dismissed on the ground that the value of the subject-matter of the suit in the Court of first instance was not Rs. 10,000 or upwards so as to satisfy the requirements of s. 110 of the Code of Civil Procedure applicable to the case. For the purposes of their decision the learned judges accepted
Law. Rep. 57 Ind. App. 56 ( 1929- 1930) Gudivada Mangamma V. Maddi Mahalakshmamma
220
the petitioners contention of fact that if interest upon the promissory notes to the date of the decree of the Subordinate J
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.