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

1928 Supreme(Mad) 283

WALLACE
A. V. Balakrishna Menon, Late – Appellant
Versus
Kakkat Manakkal Uma Alias – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Wallace, J.

1. On the 7th December, 1920, a Bench of this Court in A.S. No. 353 of 1919 between the Official Receiver of South Malabar (Mr. A.V. Balakrishna Menon), the appellant and various respondents, decreed "that the appellant do pay to respondents 1 to 6 Rs. 452-13-6 for their costs in opposing this appeal."The short point for decision in this C.M.A. is whether or not the wording of that decree has to be taken to imply that the costs can be recovered from Mr. Balakrishna Menon personally. The Lower Court has held that t does so imply and Mr. Menon appeals. He contends that such phrasing in the decree against the Official Receiver ex-officio implies that unless the Court directs otherwise he shall not be personally liable. The respondents contend that where the Court has not said that the costs will come only out of the insolvents estate in the hands of the Official Receiver, the Official Receiver is personally liable for the costs.

2. Admittedly, Mr. Balakrishna Menon was no longer holding the office of Official Receiver when the present execution petition in which execution has issued against him personally was put in. The suit itself was filed in 1917 against the pred


























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