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

1973 Supreme(Mad) 516

P.S.KAILASAM, MAHARAJAN
Mohamed Sali – Appellant
Versus
Mary Gonrath Fernando – Respondent


Advocates:
K.V. Rajagopalan, for Appellant; M. Srinivasan amicus curiae.

Judgement

MAHARAJAN, J. :- An interesting question of law arises in this Letters Patent appeal, which is directed against a second appellate judgement of this court, and it arises under the following circumstances.

2. The plaintiff, who is the respondent in this appeal, instituted a suit in the court of the District Munsif, Tuticorin, for the recovery of moneys due under a promissory note executed by the defendant, who was a resident of Nagarcoil. The plaintiff alleged that the promissory note was executed at Tuticorin and that consequently the cause of action had arisen within the territorial limits of the Tuticorin court. The suit itself was instituted on the last day of limitation. The defendant appeared in the Tuticorin court and raised several contentions, one of which was that inasmuch as the promissory note had been executed at Nagarcoil and not at Tuticorin and he himself was residing at Nagarcoil, no part of the cause of action had arisen within the territorial limits of the Tuticorin court. As many as 7 issues were framed upon the pleadings and issue No. 3 related, to the territorial jurisdiction of the Tuticorin court. But, before the trial commenced, that is to say, on 28












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