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

1940 Supreme(Mad) 126

HORWILL
Jagadambal – Appellant
Versus
Minor Sundarammal by next friend, Ponnusami Chettiar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Horwill, J.

1. The plaintiff is a minor represented by a next friend; and she has brought this suit as a reversioner against the widow of the last male owner, in possession, alleging acts of waste and mismanagement. A number of specific acts of waste and mismanagement were set out in the original plaint, which was filed on 2nd October, 1933. In 1934 an application was put in by the plaintiff to be allowed to amend the plaint on the ground that fresh acts of waste had come to the notice of the next friend. That petition was allowed in the High Court. In 1938, another application was put in to amend the plaint, alleging further acts of waste and mismanagement. That petition was refused on the ground that it was very belated and that the facts alleged must have come to the notice of the plaintiffs next friend long before the time alleged. The order dismissing the second application to amend was brought to the High Court in revision; and the revision petition was dismissed. The plaintiff has now filed an application to withdraw the suit with permission to file a fresh suit on the same causes of action. That petition was allowed and the defendants have preferred this revision pet






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