High CourtsDivision Bench(1915) 04 MAD CK 0069

Kothal Mammad Haji vs Pydal Nair and Another

Madras High Court · Decided on 20 April 1915 · Citation: AIR 1916 Mad 833(2) : 29 Ind. Cas. 578

HON’BLE JUDGES
Seshagiri Aiyar, J · Oldfield, 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

3 paragraphs · 127 words

We think that the lower Appellate Court has applied the authorities rightly. We need only add to them Raja Kamodana Venlcatanarasimha Ramachandra Row Bahadur Zamindar Garu v. Raja Lakshminarasamma Bow Zamindar Gam 30 M.P 266 : 2 M.L.T. 188 : 17 M.L.J. 139 and Tara Sundari Debi v. Sarada Gharan Bandopadhya 7 Ind. Cas. 80 : 12 C.L.J. 146. We agree that the appellant''s interest is not exempt from attachment u/s 60 (n) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

It is also argued that the property cannot be attached because appellant''s tarwad will have a right to object to its attachment The appellant cannot rely on this objection. It can be dealt with if the tarwad makes it.

The appeal against appellate order is dismissed with costs.