Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Narayanan Chettiar
Versus
Chidambaram Chettiar
Decided On : 06.02.1940
Order 9, Rule 13 - Power of Subordinate Judge to Order Deposit of Costs or Security - The lower Court's order was set aside as the Subordinate Judge had no power to order the applicant to deposit the costs of the suit or furnish security for the decree amount pending trial of an application under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The application must be restored to file and disposed of according to law.
Fact of the Case:
The lower Court's order was set aside as the Subordinate Judge had no power to order the applicant to deposit the costs of the suit or furnish security for the decree amount pending trial of an application under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Finding of the Court:
The order of the lower Court cannot be upheld. The learned Subordinate Judge had no power to order, pending trial of an application under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure that the applicant should deposit the costs of the suit or furnish security for the decree amount.
Issues: The power of the Subordinate Judge to order the deposit of costs or security pending trial of an application under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Ratio Decidendi: The Subordinate Judge had no power to order the applicant to deposit the costs of the suit or furnish security for the decree amount pending trial of an application under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Final Decision: The lower Court's order was set aside, and the application must be restored to file and disposed of according to law.
1. The order of the lower Court cannot be upheld. The learned Subordinate Judge had no power to order, pending trial of an application under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure that the applicant should deposit the costs of the suit or furnish security for the decree amount. If he had dealt with the application on its merits and had decided to grant it merely prescribing conditions under Order 9, Rule 13, no appeal would have been entertained. No such order was passed and the learned Subordinate Judge has dismissed the application merely because the security was not furnished. That he could not do. The order dismissing the application is accordingly set aside. The application must be restored to file and disposed of according to law. Costs to abide and follow the result.
AI
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
