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

1933 Supreme(Mad) 348

MADHAVAN NAIR
The Indian Bank and The Official Receiver of Madura – Appellant
Versus
Seth Bansiram Jashamal Firm, through its managing partner, Lilaram – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Madhavan Nair, J.

1. This Appeal has been filed against the decree in O.S. No. 116 of 1927 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Madura.

2. The Indian Bank, Ltd., Madras, is the appellant in this Court. The appellant was not a party to the suit or to the decree passed in it. A preliminary objection to the hearing of the appeal is taken by the respondents that since the appellant was not a party to the suit or decree in the Lower Court, this appeal is incompetent and should be dismissed.

3. The 1st plaintiff in the suit is a moneylender. The 2nd plaintiff is the purchaser of the suit properties from him. The defendant is the Official Receiver of Madura. There are no other parties to the suit.

4. The suit out of which this appeal arises was instituted by the plaintiffs under Order 21, Rule 403, Civil Procedure Code, to declare their title to two items of property and for a temporary injunction to restrain the defendant from taking possession of them.

5. On the 22nd March, 1923, a hypothecation bond Ex. A was executed in the 1st plaintiffs favour by one Somasundara Nadar, his adult son and five minor sons represented by their father. In September, 1923, the 1st plain



































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