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

1960 Supreme(Ker) 129

MOHAMMED AHMED ANSARI, C.A.VAIDIALINGAM, M.MADHAVAN NAIR
Zainabey Razak – Appellant
Versus
Noor Mohammed Rothan – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. This Civil Revision Petition has been referred to a Full Bench by Mr. Justice Kumara Pillai in view of the fact that a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the same was raised by the respondent at the time of hearing.

2. The defendant in O.S. No. 52 of 1954 of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Palghat, is the petitioner in this Civil Revision Petition. He challenges the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, dated 26th March 1958 holding that the suit as framed comes within the ambit of S.7 (4)A of the Indian Court Fees Act, 1870, as amended in the Madras State.

3. The contention raised by the defendant was that the suit comes within the ambit of suits provided under S.7, Clause.5, of the said Court Fees Act. As mentioned earlier, the learned judge overruled the objections of the defendant and held that the suit has been properly valued and court fees paid as per the provisions of S.7 (4)A of the said Court Fees Act. It is this order that is challenged by the defendant in this Civil Revision Petition.

4. At the time of hearing before Mr. Justice Kumara Pillai, objection appears to have been taken by the respondent-plaintiff that in circumstances like thi










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