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

1927 Supreme(Mad) 692

JACKSON
Alluri Timmaraju – Appellant
Versus
Alluri Narasimha Raju – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Jackson, J.

1. Plaintiff sued for possession with mesne profits. The Additional District Munsif of Rajahmundry dismissed his suit. The Appellate Court decreed the suit on 3rd February, 1919. On the 30th November, 1921, the plaintiff put in an application under Order 20, Rule 12, for the determination of mense profits. He paid batta, but service of notice was not effected, and, on his failure to pay additional batta, the court dismissed the application. He applied again on 6th December, 1922, more than three years after the date of the Appellate Court decree. The question for determination is whether plaintiff is not now debarred from having the mesne profits ascertained.

2. There can be no doubt that the application of December, 1922, is an application within the scope of Article 181 of the Indian Limitation Act, and, being three years subsequent to the time when the right to apply accrued, it is clearly barred-

3. But the application of November, 1921, was within time and it is not so clear that plaintiff may not even now treat it as effective.

4. Under O. XX, Rule 12, a statutory obligation is laid upon the court to inquire into mesne profits and pass a final decree on the ap















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