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

1955 Supreme(Mad) 219

GOVINDA MENON, RAMASWAMI GOUNDER
A. P. Jambulinga Mudaliar – Appellant
Versus
A. S. Vadivelachari – Respondent


Advocates:
N.R. Raghavachariar for Appellant.
T.R. Sundaram for Respondents.

Govinda Menon, J.-In these appeals, a question of some importance regarding the forum of appeal in certain cases, has been raised and though on innumerable occasions such appeals had been entertained by the lower appellate Courts (District Courts) there has, so far been no reported decision of this Court that has been brought to our notice, which justifies such a practice. The learned District Judge himself was of opinion that before proceeding with the merits and deciding the rights of the parties, it would be desirable to have an authoritative pronouncement regarding the jurisdiction of his Court to entertain the appeals.

In C.S. No. 100 of 1945 on the file of the Original Side of this Court, a decree for a large sum of money was passed against the defendants therein. It is unnecessary to recount the various proceedings that had taken place in the execution of that decree in this Court. Suffice it to say that after certain properties charged under the decree were sold there was a balance of Rs. 741-7-0 due as costs of the sale taxed in favour of the appellant. The High Court, on 7th April, 1949, transmitted for execution to the Court of the District Munsif, Ranipet, the decree of












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