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

1951 Supreme(Ker) 121

KOSHI, GOVINDA PILLAI, VITHAYATHIL
Mariamma Mathew – Appellant
Versus
Ittoop Poulo – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. These two revision petitions arise from an order of the District Munsiff, Parur, disposing of three separate claims preferred regarding certain properties attached before judgement, pursuant to an order of the District Munsiff, Perumpavoor. In O.S. 744 of 1112 on the file of the Perumpavoor District Munsiff's Court the plaintiff sought for and obtained an order for attachment before judgment of 12 items of immovable properties. One alone among the 12 items was situated within the jurisdiction of that Court. The remaining items lay within the jurisdiction of the Parur Munsiff's Court. The attachment of the property within the jurisdiction of the Perumpavoor Munsiff's Court was effected on 24.12.1112 and with respect to the properties within the jurisdiction of the Parur Court the Perumpavoor Munsiff sent his order of attachment and the connected papers direct to the Parur Court instead of sending the same through the District Court at Parur as required by S. 101 of the Travancore Civil Procedure Code (a provision corresponding to S. 136 of the Civil Procedure Code Act V, 1908). The District Munsiff, Parur, got the 11 items situated within his jurisdiction attached by














































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