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

1952 Supreme(Mad) 279

P.V.RAJAMANNAR, VENKATARAMA AYYAR
R. P. O’Connor – Appellant
Versus
P. G. Sampath Kumar – Respondent


Advocates:
G.A. Chellayya Nadar for Plaintiff.
Akkur Narasimhachari for Defendant.

The Chief Justice.-

The applicant filed a suit on the Original Side of this Court for the recovery of a sum of Rs.6,720 alleged to be due on a promissory note executed by the defendant in favour of his mother. The defendant pleaded inter alia that the Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit as the defendant was a permanent resident of Bangalore and the promissory note and the endorsements thereon were made outside the limits of the original jurisdiction of this Court. Thereupon the applicant took out an application praying that the plaint which he had filed should be returned to him. In the affidavit filed by him in support of the application he stated that in order to enable him to pursue his remedies it is necessary that an order should be made directing the return of the plaint to him and this Court had jurisdiction to return the plaint for presentation to the proper Court once it found it had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit. The Application came on before Panchapakesa Ayyar, J., who heard counsel on both sides and directed the papers to be placed before me for constituting a Full Bench to consider this point. I have, however, thought it was unnecessary to constitut






























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