DEVADOSS
Rathina Thevan – Appellant
Versus
Packirisami Thevan – Respondent
Devadoss, J.
1. The plaintiffs suit is on a promissory note executed by the defendant on 16th November 1921, at Kaulalampur, Federated Malay States, for 70 dollars- The defence is limitation. The District Munsif has decreed the suit and defendant prefers this civil revision petition. The petition came on before the learned Chief Justice who directed it to be posted before a Bench of two Judges as the question involved is of some importance.
2. The plaintiff and defendant are natives of Mannargudi taluk, Tanjore District. They went to the Federated Malay States to earn their livelihood; and while they were there, the defendant borrowed 70 dollars of the plaintiff and executed the promissory note sued on. The plaintiff instituted Civil Suit No. 166 of 1923 on the promissory note in Kaulalampur Magistrates Court in the Native State of Selangor and obtained judgment on 15th March 1925. He filed O.S. 319 of 1924-in the District Munsifs Court at Mannargudi on the foreign judgment obtained by him, and the suit was dismissed as it was found that the Magistrate of Kaulalampur had no jurisdiction to entertain O.S. 166 of 1923 against the defendant. The plaintiff has now brought this su
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.