High CourtsDivision Bench(1901) 12 MAD CK 0010

Krishnama Chariar vs Appasami Mudaliar and Another

Madras High Court · Decided on 3 December 1901 · Citation: (1902) ILR (Mad) 545

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bhashyam Ayyangar, J · Benson, 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

6 paragraphs · 140 words
1.

The decision in Sambasiva v. Srinivasa ILR 12 Mad. 511 by which the District Judge considered himself bound was not passed with reference

to the last clause of Section 244: of the Civil Procedure Code, which clause was added by Act VII of 1888. The effect of the amendment was

considered in Manikkam v. Tatayya ILR 21 Mad. 388 and the decision in Badri Narain v. Jai Kishen Das ILR 16 All. 483 was referred to with

approval as deciding the question. We are of opinion that the effect of the amendment is to give the right of appeal against an order determining

whether a party applying for execution is or is not the representative of the decree-holder.

2.

We allow this second appeal with costs and remand the appeal to the District Judge for disposal according to law.