AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
1 This is a reference made by the District Munsif of Palghat under Order 46, Rule 1, of the Code of Civil Procedure. The question referred is
whether when mortgage money is deposited u/s 83 of the Transfer of Property Act for the benefit of the mortgagee, and the mortgagee is a
Malabar tarward or tavazhi governed by the Marumakkathayamu Law, consisting of a mother and her minor daughters who are all made counter-
petitioners to the petition put in u/s 83, the minors being represented by their mother as guardian ad litem, the money may be paid out to the mother
alone as manager without taking security from her under Order 32, rule 6, of the CPC to protect the interests of her minor daughters? The Mansif
is of opinion that although the proceeding before him is not a suit or appeal, he is entitled to make this reference by virtue of the provisions of
Section 141 of the CPC which lays down that ""the procedure provided in this code in regard to suits shall be followed, as far as it can be made
applicable, in all proceedings in any court of civil jurisdiction."" In our opinion this reference is incompetent. It has been held in numerous cases that
Section 141 will not give a party to a proceeding, not a suit, a right of appeal. See Thomas Souza v. Gulam Moidin Beari ILR (1902) M. 438 and
Parasuram Ayyar v. Seshia ILR (1903) M. 504. The corresponding provision in Section 38 of Act XXIII of 1861 expressed in similar language
was interpreted by Jackson and Mitter JJ. to extend to other proceedings only ""the mode of trial and the procedure incidental thereto"" laid down in
the CPC and not a right of appeal. See Huree Nath Koondoo v. Madhoo Soodun Saha 19 W.R. 122 followed in Ningappa v. Gangawa ILR
(1885) B. 433. We are of opinion that the section does not authorize a court to invoke the jurisdiction of another court, any more than it authorises
a party to do so by way of appeal. Such right must be expressly conferred by statute. See Minakshi v. Subramanya ILR (1887) M. 26. We
therefore decline to answer the question. The record will be returned to the Munsif who will dispose of the case according to law.