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

1934 Supreme(Mad) 247

BEASLEY
T. P. Kuppuswami Pillai – Appellant
Versus
Alwar Chettiar – Respondent


ORDER

Beasley, C.J.

1. The first point raised in the civil revision petition is one of jurisdiction, namely, that the suit in the District Munsifs Court should have been brought on the Original Side of that Court and not on the Small Cause Side as it was. This is a point which is raised in the written statement of the defendant. No mention of this point is made anywhere in his judgment by the learned District Munsif and I am entitled to assume and do assume that it was a point which was not pressed before him. There was no adjudication upon it and the learned District Munsif proceeded to deal with the case on its merits. I have been invited however to consider the point, it being urged that this being a point of jurisdiction it is quite proper to take it here. I am well aware that points of jurisdiction, even though not taken in the lower Court, can be argued here. At the same; time I am bound to state that the revisional powers of the High Court are not exercised unless it appears to the High Court that injustice has been done to a litigant.

2. The High Court will certainly not use its revisional powers to bring about in justice. In order to see whether the revisional powers should b

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