High CourtsDivision Bench(1925) 12 MAD CK 0011

Arunachala Naicker vs C.K. Venkatachari and Another

Madras High Court · Decided on 9 December 1925 · Citation: (1926) 23 LW 407 : (1926) 50 MLJ 368

HON’BLE JUDGES
Krishnan, J

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

15 paragraphs · 324 words

Krishnan, J.—This petition refers to an election petition which had been filed in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Chingleput against the

election of the President of the Union Board of Uttaranallur. The Subordinate Judge apparently acting under Rule 4, Clause (3) of the Rules framed

under the Madras Local Boards Act transmitted the case to the Court of the District Munsif of Maduranthakam. The District Munsif seems to have

realised that the procedure was not justifiable as his Court could not be treated as a Court of Subordinate to the Subordinate judge under Rule 4,

Clause (3) and the matter was represented to the Subordinate Judge. But the Subordinate judge decided that he had power to transmit the case to

the District Munsif and to get him to try it. This revision petition is against the order of the District Munsif proceeding to try the case under the

orders of the Subordinate Judge.

2.

It seems to me that the order of the Subordinate Judge sending the case to the District Munsif is not correct. That order is not supported before

me by the respondent''s vakil. The Court of the District Munsif of Maduranthakam cannot be treated as a Court subordinate to the Court of the

Subordinate Judge of Chingleput as no appeals lie from that Court to the Subordinate Judge, but appeals lie to the District Court only. In the Civil

Courts Act the District Munsifs are not treated as subordinates to the Subordinate Judges. That being so, it is not possible to hold that the District

Munsifs Court was a Court to which the Subordinate Judge was fen-titled to send this petition. The Subordinate Judge himself should have tried

the matter.

3.

I therefore set aside all the order passed in this case and direct the Subordinate Judge to dispose of the election petition at an early date. Costs

of this revision petition will be costs in the election petition.