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

1942 Supreme(Mad) 109

ALFRED HENRY LIONEL LEACH
Yalpi Virupakshappa – Appellant
Versus
Chowdireddi Veerabhadra Gowd – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.

1. The appellant obtained a money decree against the 2nd and 3rd respondents in the Court of the District Munsiff of Bellary. In execution of that decree he attached certain immovable properties. The 1st respondent applied for an order removing the attachment on the ground that the properties were his. His application was rejected and consequently he instituted a suit under the provisions of Order 21, rule 63 to establish his title. When the suit came on for hearing the 1st respondent realized that he could not succeed without a prayer for possession and he applied for leave to amend his plaint in this respect. The leave to amend was refused, but the District Munsiff intimated that he would be prepared to allow the 1st respondent to withdraw his suit with liberty to file a fresh suit under Order 23, rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The 1st respondent, realising that he would be in a difficulty with regard to limitation, raised this question before the District Munsiff, but the District Munsiff considered that Section 14 of the Limitation Act would apply. Accordingly he decided to embody his opinion in his order. He did so in these words:









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