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

WIJEMANNE v. COSTA


Wijemanne V. Costa

1959 Present : Weerasooriya, J., and K. D. de Silva, J.

D. G. WIJEMANNE, Appellant, and C. COSTA, Respondent

S. C 76, with Application 210-D. C. Panadura, 4,824

    Appeal-Abatement-Security for costs-Hypothecation by bond prior to acceptance of security by Court-Effect-Officer" before whom the bold may be executed- Civil Procedure Code, 88.756 (1) and (3), 757.

An order abating an appeal would be valid if the bond hypothecating security for costs of appeal in terms of section 756 (J) read with section 757 of the Civil Procedure Code is executed before the security is accepted by the Court. However, if the security given is in cash, relief may be granted under sub-section 20f section 756.

A bond hypothecating security for costs of appeal must be executed before the .Judge or the Secretary or the Chief Clerk, A bond, therefore, hypothecating a sun of money and signed before a Justice of the Peace is not a valid hypothecation.

APPEAL, with application in revision, from an order of the District Court, Panadura.

H. V. Perera, Q.C., with E. A. G. de Silva and M. L. de Silva, for the- defendant-appellant.

C. Thiagalingam, Q.C., with T. P. P.







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