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

1964 Supreme(Ker) 147

M.S.MENON, S.VELU PILLAI, M.MADHAVAN NAIR
Vamanan Nambudiri – Appellant
Versus
Narayana Kurup – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. The appellant in this Second Appeal was the plaintiff in O.S. No. 890 of 1942 of the court of the Munsiff of Badagara. In that suit he sought and obtained the recovery of possession of an item of property under the Malabar Tenancy Act, 1929.

2. The suit was decreed on 13-9-1948 and possession was taken from the respondents on 23-10-1943. After the passing of the Malabar Tenancy (Amendment) Act, 1956, the respondents applied for a restoration of possession by an application under S.5(2) of that enactment, I.A. No. 101 of 1957 in O.S. No. 890 of 1942.

3. The application was allowed and the appellant before us filed A.S. No. 352 of 1959 of the court of the Subordinate Judge of Badagara. That appeal did not succeed. It was dismissed on the ground that no appeal was available from a decision in an application under S.5(2) of the Malabar Tenancy (Amendment) Act, 1956. This Second Appeal challenges the correctness of that decision.

4. The sole question for determination in the second appeal is whether an appeal is available from a decision directing a restoration of possession in an application under S.5(2) of the Malabar Tenancy (Amendment) Act, 1956. In other words the quest





































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