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

1934 Supreme(Mad) 405

BEASLEY
S. Subramania Ayyar – Appellant
Versus
Madras Drug Stores – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Beasley, C.J.

1. This matter came up before the Pull Bench of the Court of Small Causes upon an order made by the Registrar of the Court under Section 52(2), Civil P.C. It was argued before the Pull Bench that the Registrar had no jurisdiction to pass such an order. Section 35, Presidency Small Cause Courts Act, says:

The registrar may receive applications for the execution of decrees of any value passed by the Court and may commit and discharge judgment-debtors and make any order in respect thereof which a Judge of the Court may make under this Act.

The marginal note to that section is:

Registrar may execute all decrees with the same powers as a Judge.

2. It is admitted here by the petitioner that a Judge would have power to make .the order under Section 52(2), "Civil P. C, that is, the order in question here. This is clearly a proceeding in execution. That being so, the section is perfectly clear and unambiguous. The Registrar has exactly the same powers as the Judge and exercises these powers in execution. This is not a suit as contended here. The Registrar therefore had power to make the order in question. Under these circumstances the order of both the Registrar and of the

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