AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
We think that the preliminary objection taken by the Government Pleader is wall founded, and that no appeal lies against the order of the District
Judge passed u/s 16, Clause 7, of Madras Regulation III of 1802.
The vakil for the appellant argues that an appeal is given by Section 647, Civil Procedure Code, and relies on the decision of this Court in Sultan
Ackeni Sahib v. Shaik Bava Malimiyar ILR 4 Mad. 285.
That decision must, however, he held to be overruled by the decision of the Privy Council in Meenakshi Naidoo v. Subramaniya Sastri L.R. 14
IndAp 160 : ILR 11 Mad. 26. In the case of Hureenath Koondu v. Modhoo Soodun Saka 19 W.R. 122. it was held that no appeal was given by
Section 38 of Act XXIII of 1861 against an order passed under Regulation I of 1798. We do not think that, so far as the present matter is
concerned, Section 647 of the present CPC differs in any material degree from Section 38 of Act XXIII of 1861, and in our opinion, the grounds
of that decision are applicable to the present case. We dismiss this appeal with costs.