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

1950 Supreme(Mad) 252

RAGHAVA RAO
Bhimavarapu Venkatasubbayya – Appellant
Versus
Addanki Bapadu (died) – Respondent


Advocates:
K. Krishnamurthi and G. Suryanarayana for Appellant.
B.V. Ramanarasu for Respondent.

Judgment

An interesting point has been raised by Mr. Krishnamurthi for the appellant in this case. The suit was laid by the respondent before me for a declaration of his title and for an injunction to restrain the defendant from interfering with his possession. The plaintiff rested his title upon a certain sale deed, dated nth October, 1930 and also upon a prescriptive title by enjoyment had by him all along from the date of that sale deed. The defence, so far as material to the disposal of the present second appeal, is that there was an award on a reference to arbitration which is binding upon the plaintiff and precludes him from filing this action. The learned District Munsif of Ongole dismissed the suit giving effect to the defence above referred to.

The award was pronounced on 12th January, 1944 and registered on 24th March, 1944. On 9th March, 1944, it was that the suit, out of which this second appeal arises, was instituted.

The learned District Munsif at the end of his judgment says,

"As the award was pronounced before the suit, it is not possible to accept the plaintiff’s contention that in spite of it the Court can adjudicate on the rights of the parties."

On appeal the learned







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