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

1898 Supreme(Mad) 51

Nittukaruppa Goundan – Appellant
Versus
Kumarasami Goundan – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. We think that in this case the words construed by the Sub-Judge as "when yon require" imply a condition as was also decided in a case where the words actually used were "on demand." (S. A 200 of 1897). There the words were not considered as merely technical words, as they were interpreted to be in Perumal Ayyan v. Alagirisami Bhagacathar, I. L. R., 20 M., 245. The Sub-Judge was therefore right in holding the suit was not barred, and this appeal is dismissed with costs.

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