Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MARAS
Waller
Chakrapani Padhi
Versus
Krushno Naiko
Decided On : 4 December, 1925
Interference - Lodgment Schedule - Order 21, Rule 89, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Fact of the Case:
The court considered the nature of the lodgment schedule in relation to Order 21, Rule 89, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the lodgment schedule did not meet the requirements of an application under Order 21, Rule 89, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and therefore, no ground for interference was established.
Issues: Nature of the lodgment schedule in relation to Order 21, Rule 89, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that for an application under Order 21, Rule 89, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, there must be something more than a deposit, and the lodgment schedule did not fulfill this requirement.
Final Decision: No ground for interference was established, and the court did not find the lodgment schedule to be an application under Order 21, Rule 89, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Waller, J.
1. Assuming that second appeal lies, which is more than doubtful vide Asimuddi Sheik v. Sundari Bibi [1911] 38 Cal. 339 and Kachu v. Trimbak Khemchand [1920] 44 Bom. 472, no ground has been made out for interference. It is impossible to treat the lodgment schedule as an application of the nature contemplated by Order 21, Rule 89, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. There must be something more than a deposit.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
