SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1976 Supreme(Ker) 63

V.BALAKRISHNA ERADI, K.BASKARAN, T.CHANDRASEKHARA MENON
MOHAMMAD HAJI – Appellant
Versus
AYAMMA – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. The office has taken an objection regarding the maintainability of this appeal under S.5 of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958 referred to as the Act) and the matter has been sent up before court for decision on that point. The Division Bench before whom the matter came up for bearing in the first instance has referred it to a Full Bench.

2. The appeal is sought to be filed against the order passed by a learned single judge of this court dismissing an interlocutory application C. M. P. No. 17769 of 1975 filed by the appellant in Second Appeal No. 669 of 1975. The prayer in that civil miscellaneous petition was for staying the hearing of the second appeal under S.3 of the Kerala Debtors' (Temporary Relief) Act, 1975 (Act 30 of 1975). The learned judge held that S.3 did not apply to the case and that the request for stay could not, therefore, be granted.

3. It is contended before us by counsel for the appellant that since Act 30 of 1975 had come into force only during the pendency of the second appeal and the question of applicability of S.3 of the enactment to the case on hand had been raised by his client for the first time only before the High Court, the decision by the



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top