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

1891 Supreme(Mad) 109

Sambasiva Chari – Appellant
Versus
Ramaswami Reddi – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. We are clearly of opinion that the provisions of the Limitation Act do not apply to extend the time of 30 days limited by Sections 18 and 51 of Act VIII of 1865 for bringing a Summary Suit to set aside a destraint. The cases at Veeramma v. Abbiah I. L. R., 18 M., 99 and Appa Rau Sanayi Aswa Rau v. Krishnamurthi Ib. 20 M., 249 and Kumara Akkappa v. Sithala Naidu 476 place the matter beyond all doubt. Nor is Section 10 of the General Clauses Act or Section 11 of the Madras General Clauses Act applicable, inasmuch as they do not refer back to Acts of the year 1865.

2. But there is a general principle of law which has been recognized in two recent cases by the High Court of Calcutta Shooshee Bhusan v. Gobind Chunder (I. L. R., 18 C, 231 and Peary Mohund Aich v. Anunda Charan Biswas Ib. 631) that "where parties are prevented from doing a thing in Court on a particular day, not by any act of their own, but by the act of the Court itself they are entitled to do it at the first subsequent opportunity." I. L. R., 18 C, at p. 636. We see no reason why this principle should not be followed in cases like the present, when it has been adopted as a rule of law in cases to which the Lim


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