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

1939 Supreme(Mad) 213

PANDRANG ROW
Haji Muhammad Shadak Koyi Sahib – Appellant
Versus
Burra Venkata Komaraju – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Pandrang Row, J.

1. This is an application for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council from the decree of this High Court made in Appeal No. 330 of 1936 on the 14th February, 1939. That decree merely confirmed the decree of the trial Court, the finding of both the Courts being concurrent on the main question in the suit, namely, whether there was gross negligence on the part of the Court guardian appointed to defend the suit in which a decree had been passed against the minor, the present litigation being one to have that decree set aside as against the minor. The entire litigation proceeded in the trial Court as well as in this Court on the basis that gross negligence, if proved, would be sufficient to entitle the plaintiff to have the earlier decree set aside, and neither in the grounds of appeal in this Court nor during the arguments at the hearing of the appeal was it stated that gross negligence by itself would not be sufficient in the absence of fraud and collusion; But it is this point and this point alone that is sought to be raised in the present application for leave to appeal. The petitioner wants an opportunity of having this question settled by the highest jud

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