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

1924 Supreme(Mad) 818

COUTTS-TROTTER
Official Assignee Of Madras – Appellant
Versus
Zamindar Of Udayarpalayam – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Coutts-Trotter, C.J.

1. This is a matter clearly within the jurisdiction of the Court under Section 18, corresponding to the familiar section of the English Bankruptcy Act whereby cases of this kind are transferred as a matter of course every day and every one who had ever had an experience of these matters will be quite familiar with it.

2. The appeal must he allowed and then learned Judge must exercise the jurisdiction which he has held that he did not possess. Costs on the Original Side scale.

Madhavan Nair, J.

3. I agree.

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