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

1960 Supreme(Mad) 335

VEERASWAMI
The Corporation of Madras – Appellant
Versus
Vijayalakshmi Ammal – Respondent


Advocates:
T. Chengalvaroyan, for Appellant.
T. R. Srinivasa Ayyangar, for Respondent.

Judgment.-

This Second Appeal by the Corporation of Madras arises out of a suit which is instituted for recovery of a sum of Rs. 702-11-9 together with interest. The claim relates to the proportionate amount payable by the defendant to the Corporation in respect of a certain work done by the latter in metalling and lighting a private street in S.A. No. 94/2 in Mambalam, Madras. There is no dispute that the liability of the defendant arose under section 218 (1) of the Madras City Municipal Act, 1919. One of the defences was that the suit was barred by limitation, in view of section 390-A of that Act.

The trial Court held that the suit was barred by limitation in so far as it related to the recovery of charges for improvements under Exhibit A-11 but that the claim in respect of expenses incurred for lighting except items 7 and 8 was in time. The trial Court decreed the suit on that basis. On appeals preferred by both the Corporation as well as the defendant, in so far as the decree of the trial Court was against the one or the other, the learned Additional Judge of the City Civil Court agreed with the findings of the trial Court and dismissed both the appeals. The aggrieved Corporatio











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