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

1933 Supreme(Mad) 187

KRISHNAN PANDALAI
Ponnuthaye Ammal – Appellant
Versus
The Official Receiver – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Krishnan Pandalai, J.

1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff (decree-holder) against the order of the District Judge of Coimbatore declaring on the application of the respondent (the Official Receiver of Coimbatore) that the decree is of no force as against the respondent and that the execution of it by sale of the properties of the insolvent (1st defendant) in the decree cannot proceed.

2. The facts are simple and undisputed. The appellant is a widow and she sued the 1st defendant, her husbands brother and the 2nd defendant, son of the 1st defendant, members of the joint family of her husband, for arrears of maintenance and for future maintenance claiming a charge for the latter on certain family properties specified in the plaint. Four days after the suit was registered, i.e., on the 22nd August, 1927, the 1st defendant was adjudicated insolvent. On the 21st November the plaintiffs vakil reported that the 1st defendant had been adjudicated and asked for time to consider what should be done. On the 12th December he submitted that he did not want to add the Official Receiver as a party and elected to proceed with the suit as it stood. On this no one seriously defended the suit



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