High Courts(1901) 12 MAD CK 0009

Pathambi vs Mytheen Bibi and Another

Madras High Court · Decided on 4 December 1901 · Citation: (1902) 12 MLJ 96

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

11 paragraphs · 224 words
1.

The Judgment of the lower appellate Court dismissing the suit is baaed on the view that when the present suit was instituted, the decree in the

former suit remained unexecuted and that tins plaintiff might have applied for execution of that decree.

2.

It seems to us that the decree in the former suit had been executed at the time the present suit was instituted. Under the original decree the

plaintiff entered into joint possession and satisfaction of the decree was entered up. She then applied for and obtained an amendment of the

decree, without taking steps to have the order recording1 satisfaction of the decree set aside.

3.

The amendment of a decree the satisfaction of which had been recorded was a nullity. The state of thing''s, therefore, is that in satisfaction of her

decree the plaintiff entered into joint possession. She alleges she has been ousted, from her joint possession.

4.

The fact that she has been ousted from joint possession (if she has been so ousted) gives her a fresh cause of action in respect of which a fresh

suit is maintainable.

5.

We must sot aside the decrees of the two lower Courts. The case must be restored to the .District Munsif''s file in order that he may dispose of

it according to law. Costs will follow the result.