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

HUSSAN v. PEIRIS et al.


Hussan V. Peiris Et Al.,

1932 Present : Macdonell C.J., Garvin S.P.J., and Dalton J.

HUSSAN v. PEIRIS et al.

209-D. C. Kalutara, 14,612.

Jurisdiction-Partition action-Several defendants-Residence-Test of jurisdiction-Any defendant-Courts Ordinance, s. 65 and Civil Procedure Code, s. 9 (a).

An action may be brought in a District Court where any party defendant resides, viz., any defendant against whom the right to any relief is alleged to exist.

A party defendant in section 65 of the Courts Ordinance and in section 9 (a) of the Civil Procedure Code means any party defendant.

THIS was an action in which the plaintiff sued the defendants all resident within the jurisdiction of the District Court of Kalutara to partition a land, situate at Beruwala, a place beyond the jurisdiction of the Kalutara Court. The intervenients, who were residents at Beruwala, claimed a portion of the land and pleaded that the Court had no jurisdiction. The District Judge upheld the plea and dismissed the action.

N. E. Weerasooria (with him D. E. Wijewardene), for plaintiff-appellant. -There is no question that the District Court of Kalutara had jurisdiction at the commencement of














































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