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

1946 Supreme(Mad) 257

BELLIE
K. Kalianna Gounder – Appellant
Versus
Balasubramaniam (minor) – Respondent


Advocates:
R. Desikan for Petitioner.
A. Srirangachariar for Respondents.

Judgment

The petitioner is defendant 1 in O. S. No. 226 of 1944 filed by three sons of their next friend, their mother, (a) for a declaration that a sale deed executed by their father for himself and as guardian of the first and second plaintiffs was not binding on them, not having been executed for family necessities, (b) for partition and (c) for recovery of the properties.

The suit was filed in the Sub-Court, Salem, but was returned by the Subordinate Judge, apparently after consideration for presentation to the District Munsiff’s. Court of Namakkal on the ground that it was, in essence, a suit for possession and was within the jurisdiction of the latter Court. It was duly presented in the Court of the District Munsiff, Namakkal; but again, the plaintiffs met with a check, because, on the preliminary consideration of an issue relating to jurisdiction, the District Munsiff rejected the reasoning of the Sub-Court and held that the suit was, in substance, one for declaration and that therefore section 7(iv-A) of the Court Fees Act applied. In the result, he held that having regard to the value of the property, it was beyond the jurisdiction of the Munsiff’s Court. This was on 20th Fe




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