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

1920 Supreme(Mad) 155

J.WALLIS
Raja Jaga Veera Rama Venkateswar – Appellant
Versus
Chidambaram Chetty – Respondent


JUDGMENT

John Wallis, C.J.

1. In May 1900 the plaintiff duly instituted the present suit in the Subordinate Court of Madura West where the mortgaged property was situated and obtained a decree under Section 88 of the Transfer of Property Act. In May 1910, this Court was abolished, and by virtue of Section 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure this suit was transferred by operation of law to the newly constituted District Court of Ramnad, as the place where the mortgaged property was situated was within the jurisdiction of that Court and was not within the jurisdiction of the newly constituted Subordinate Court of Ramnad. In 1916 the plainthif applied to the Subordinate Court of Ramnad, which as, we have seen, had no jurisdiction over the suit, for a decree for sale under Order 34, Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure and obtained the decree in 1917. The mistake appears to have been occasioned by the fact that the new Subordinate Court of Ramnad was described in the notification constituting it as created instead of the Subordinate Court of Madura West whereas its territorial jurisdiction was more limited. The 16th defendant, who did not appear, applied for a review of the decree but not









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