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

1940 Supreme(Mad) 481

KRISHNASWAMI AYYANGAR
Raju Chettiar alias Ramasami Chettiar – Appellant
Versus
Ramakkal – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Krishnaswami Ayyangar, J.

1. This is an appeal against the order of the Subordinate Judge of Dindigul setting aside the decree passed by the District Munsif of Periyakulam dismissing the suit of the appellant on the ground that she had failed and neglected to perform a condition precedent on the performance of which she was granted an adjournment of the suit.

2. The facts are these. The first respondent filed the suit out of which the present appeal has arisen for a declaration that the decree and subsequent proceedings in O.S. No. 156 of 1930 on the file of the District Munsifs Court, Periyakulam, are void and not binding on her and for recovery of possession of certain immovable properties together with mesne profits. She obtained leave to file the suit in forma pauperis. The defendants contested the suit and issues were framed on the 20th August, 1937 embodying the questions in dispute. The trial was fixed for the 12th October, 1937. On that day the plaintiff was not ready and the suit was adjourned to the 24th November, 1937. The plaintiff was again unready and the suit had again to be adjourned to the 21 st January, 1938. On the 21st January, 1938 the plaintiff was once













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