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

1933 Supreme(Mad) 347

MADHAVAN NAIR
Byya Reddi – Appellant
Versus
T. S. Gopala Rao – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Madhavan, J.

1. This Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal arises out of an application for execution made by the appellant. He obtained a decree in O.S. No. 533 of 1921 on the file of the Court of the District Munsif of Krishnagiri on 5th September, 1922. This decree was confirmed on appeal by the District Judge of Salem in A. S. No. 275 of 1922 on the 20th April, 1925. The judgment-debtor preferred an appeal against the appellate decree to the High Court. This appeal was filed four days out of time. The High Court in C. M. P. No. 3943 of 1925 refused to excuse the delay in presenting the second appeal. In consequence, the C.M.P. and S.R. (the second appeal sought to be preferred to the High Court) were dismissed on the 5th March, 1926. The decree now sought to be executed is the decree passed on first appeal on 20th April, 1925. The present application to execute that decree was filed on 6th September, 1928, that is after the lapse of more than three years. The respondent, the judgment-debtor, contended that the application is barred by limitation. The decree-holder contended that the application is not barred inasmuch as it was filed within three years from 5th March, 1926, t












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