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

1890 Supreme(Mad) 67

M.AYYAR, WEIR
Govinda – Appellant
Versus
Bhandari – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. A preliminary objection is taken on behalf of respondent that the appeal is 113 days out of time.

2. If the time occupied in disposing of the application for review by the Subordinate Judges Court, viz., 152 days, is allowed and excluded, it is admitted the appeal will be in time. The question is whether the appellant has shown any sufficient ground for the review time being excluded. He cannot claim its exclusion as of right, but merely as a matter of grace within the judicial discretion of the Court. The grounds of review, which have been read, are, with one exception, grounds which were already argued and decided against in appeal and are not grounds for review.

3. Certain documents were said to have been newly discovered, but the circumstances in which they are alleged to have been discovered are said to be such as should not be believed. This was the view taken by the Subordinate Judge and we cannot say that it was unfounded.

4. It has also been brought to our notice in this connection that additional evidence was taken even at the hearing of the appeal, so that the discovery of further evidence at a later stage seems improbable.

5. The petition for review, moreover, wa


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