High CourtsDivision Bench(1916) 02 MAD CK 0011

Nidamarthi Krishnamoorthy and Another vs Garigiparti Ganapatilingam

Madras High Court · Decided on 25 February 1916 · Citation: 34 Ind. Cas. 741 : (1916) 3 LW 375

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sadasiva Aiyar, J · Moore, 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

7 paragraphs · 155 words
1.

The application for adjournment, in which the Court was asked to send the records to the arbitrator to whom the parties had already referred

the matter in dispute in the pending suit, seems to have been treated by all parties as an application to the Court itself to also make a reference to

the said arbitrator under Schedule II, paragraph 1, of Section 1. The Court acted upon that application on that footing, and we think the appellant

is estopped from contending that the application was not of such a character.

2.

Further, we think we are bound by the interpretation put upon the Privy Council decision in Ghulam Khan v. Muhammad Hassan 6 C.W.N.

226 by the Full Bench of this Court in Tallapragada Suryanaraina Row v. Tallapragada Sarabaya 9 Ind. Cas. 173 : (1911) 1 M.W.N. 151

3.

The Letters Patent Appeals Nos. 325 and 326 of 1914 are dismissed with costs.