High CourtsDivision Bench(1929) 05 MAD CK 0016

(Parambathkandi) Olayatt Kunhu vs Ussan Kasim Sait and Another

Madras High Court · Decided on 2 May 1929 · Citation: AIR 1929 Mad 841

HON’BLE JUDGES
Madhavan Nair, 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 · 207 words

Madhavan Nair, J.—The question for consideration in this case is whether the order of the lower Court giving conditional permission to the petitioner to defend the case only on giving security is right. It has been found by the Court that the petitioner has a defence which has to be considered. It has also found that the plaintiff has seemingly a strong case. In view of the opinion of the learned Judge which I have stated above it cannot be said that there are no bona fides on the part of defendant 2. In these circumstances I think the learned Judge should have granted permission to the petitioner to defend the case unconditionally. Of course this Court interferes only very rarely u/s 115, Civil P.C. But when the conclusion of the Judge is obviously opposed to the finding expressed in the body of the judgment. I think it is a case where this Court should interfere and set aside the order. The order is therefore set aside. Each party will bear its own costs. Of course the order giving defendant 2 leave to defend will remain.

2.

The only order that is set aside is that part of it which relates to the imposition of the security.