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

1936 Supreme(Mad) 448

BURN
Etasseri Munootta Mangalath Illath Kesavan Nambudri – Appellant
Versus
Puthusseri Theva Amma – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Burn, J.

1. The only point that has been pressed before me in this appeal is the question of limitation. The plaintiffs filed this suit on 7th August 1928 to set aside an order passed upon their claim petition on 10th November 1923. Under Rule 63 of Order 21, Civil P.C., the suit must be filed with, in one year from the date of the order and prima facie the suit is long out of time. The plaintiffs claimed that they were entitled to exclude from the period of one year all the time which was taken by them in preferring appeals (A.S. No. 174 of 1925 on the file of the sub-Court and A.S. No. 28 of 1924 on the file of the District Court) from the order of the executing Court dated 10th November 1923. The learned Subordinate Judge reversed the decision of the executing Court by his decree dated 17th July 1925. A second appeal was preferred to the High Court, which was disposed of by the High Court on 11th November 1927. The High Court held that the claim was one preferred Under Rule 58, Order 21, Civil P.C., and that it was not a matter coming Under Section 47 and consequently no appeal lay to the District Court from the order of the executing Court. The learned Subordinate Judges





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