RAMESAM
Subramania Aiyar – Appellant
Versus
V. Rama Aiyar – Respondent
Ramesam, J.
1. This is an appeal against the order of the Additional Subordinate Judge of East Tanjore at Mayavaram dismissing O.S. No. 40 of 1921 on the ground that the proper court-fee has not been paid. The order rejecting the plaint could have been passed only under Order 7, Rule 11, Civil Procedure Code. The suit was brought by the plaintiff claiming to be the reversioner, under the Hindu Law, of one Ramaswami Aiyar and he claimed the property after the death of his widow and his daughters. The plaintiff is his daughters son. The suit was filed on the last day allowed by the law of limitation. To some extent this fact seems to have prejudiced the Subordinate Judge against the plaintiff. While we have no particular sympathy with a stale suit, I do not see any reason why one should be prejudiced against the plaintiff on that ground. The plaint was presented on 28th August, 1920. It was returned by the office with four requisitions. The fourth is "valuation has not been given in respect of all the properties described in the plaint schedules." This was on the 30th August. The plaintiffs pleader re-presented the plaint on 7th September with the note "Those mentioned in the
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.