High CourtsDivision Bench(1929) 04 MAD CK 0006

Govindaraja Mudali vs Samarapuri Chettiar and Another

Madras High Court · Decided on 4 April 1929 · Citation: AIR 1930 Mad 112

HON’BLE JUDGES
Wallace, J

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

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

Loading membership options…

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

9 paragraphs · 183 words

Wallace, J.—The only direct authorities on the point of law cited before me are three, Gopal Daji v. Gopal Sonu [1904] 28 Bom. 248,

Swami Aiyangar alias Srinivasa Varthachariar Vs. Lakshmi alias Echammal, and Harbans Lal v. Nathu [1930] 105 P.R. 1919. Of these the two

former are against the view taken by the learned District Judge and the latter is in his favour, relying, however, on a decision of this Court in

Velayudan Pillai v. Vythilingam Pillai [1912] 24 M.L.J. 66, which deliberately refrains from deciding the point at issue here. So the weight of

authority is against the lower appellate Court''s view, and I see no reason why I should take a different view from that taken by this Court, already

in Swami Aiyangar alias Srinivasa Varthachariar Vs. Lakshmi alias Echammal, . The liability of the surety is, therefore, not saved from the bar of

limitation by the payment by the principal.

2.

I reverse the decree of the lower appellate Court and restore that of the District Munsif Appellant will get his costs here and in the lower

appellate Court.