High CourtsDivision Bench(1917) 02 MAD CK 0031

Kailasa Pandaram vs Ramanuja Naidu and Others

Madras High Court · Decided on 22 February 1917 · Citation: AIR 1918 Mad 1204(1) : 39 Ind. Cas. 950 : (1917) 6 LW 19

HON’BLE JUDGES
Oldfield, J · Bakewell, 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

2 paragraphs · 151 words
1.

The respondents have sought to support the lower Appellate Court''s order only as based on the application of Somasundaram Pillai of 6th December 1905. We cannot treat the order dismissing it as one recognizing the validity of Somasundaram''s assignment, or in view of that order, which became final, assume that his assignment was valid. We, moreover, do not regard it as immaterial whether the maker of the application relied on as extending time failed to obtain recognition of his right and we respectfully dissent from Vasha Kuthiyakath v. Ashi Kalakath 5 Ind. Cas. 120, relied on by respondents. Holding that the application of 6th December 1905 is pot shown to have been made by a person entitled^ to make it, we decide that the present petition is put of time.

2.

We, therefore, allow the appeal against appellate order and dismiss Execution Petition No. 514 of 1909 with costs throughout.