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

1922 Supreme(Mad) 92

AYLING, KRISHNAN
Sundaresan Chettiar – Appellant
Versus
Viswanada Pandara Sannadhi And – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Krishnan, J.

1. This Second Appeal arises from a suit brought) by the plaintiff against the late Pandara Sannadbi of Vedaranniyam Devastanam for money due on a bond executed by him to plaintiffs deceased grand-uncle. Plaintiff claimed a decree against the defendant personally and against the trust funds, as he alleged that the money was borrowed for devastanam purposes. The defendant raised several pleas which are not material now but did not set up any plea that the debt-was not binding on the devastanam properties.

2. The Subordinate Judge decreed the suit as brought in plaintiffs favour and gave him a decree for payment by the defendant personally and out of the temple funds. The Pandara Sannadhi appealed and, besides raising objections to the findings of the trial Court, pleaded that he was not in any event personally liable. He did not specifically object to the liability cast on the temple properties. Pending this Appeal the Pandara Sannadhi was removed from office in another suit and the contesting second respondent before us was appointed Receiver of the temple properties. He was added as party appellant on his own motion, and he asked leave of the Court to his a new











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