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

1937 Supreme(Mad) 439

PANDRANG ROW
Secretary of State – Appellant
Versus
Pullela Rangaswami Naidu – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Pandrang Row, J.

1. These are appeals from the preliminary and the final decree in O.S. No. 58 of 1929 on the file of the subordinate Judge of Vellore. The suit was for sale of the plaint properties in satisfaction of two mortgages that had been executed by defendants 1 and 2 and the undivided deceased father of defendant 3. Defendants 4 to 6 were imp leaded as persons claiming to be puisne mortgagees of one or other of the mortgaged properties. The only contesting defendant was defendant 7 the Secretary of State for India in Council, who had some of the properties mortgaged in his favour under the provisions of the Land Improvement Loans Act. Defendant 7 not only claimed priority in respect of his mortgage, but also contended that the suit should be dismissed summarily, as no notice of the suit was given to him prior to suit as required by law. For some reason or other, this objection to the maintainability of the suit was not made the subject-matter of a separate issue and the judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge is silent on this point. The same point has been repeated in the grounds of appeal by the Secretary of State. Before dealing with this point it is necessary



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