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

1951 Supreme(Mad) 330

PANCHAPAKESA AYYAR
N. C. Ganapathi Chettiar – Appellant
Versus
Seth Chunilal – Respondent


Advocates:
M.V. Ganapathi for Petitioner.
P.V. Subrahmanyam for Respondent.

Judgment.-

This petition raises an interesting question of law viz-, whether when a Presidency Court of Small Causes orders a plaint to be returned for presentation to the proper Court having jurisdiction, the order in question will amount to an order entitling the party for a new trial under section 38 of the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act.

The facts are briefly these: The petitioner, Ganapathi Chettiar, a merchant of Erode, had filed S.C.S. No. 2627 of 1948 in the Court of Small Causes at Madras for refund of an advance of Rs. 400 paid by his son, on his behalf, to one Seth Chunilal, a merchant or commission agent at Agra, for purchase of pulses, under a contract, Exhibit D-1, dated 2nd March, 1948, on the ground that the pulses supplied were of inferior quality and he had repudiated the contract. The learned Judge of the Court of Small Causes, after hearing both sides, and discussing many contentions, and issues, finally passed an order, on issue 3, returning the plaint for presentation to the proper Court, viz., the Court at Agra, holding that his Court had no jurisdiction to try this suit, as no part of the cause of action had arisen here. Against this, the petitioner filed N





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