AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ramaswami Gounder, J.—In C. R. P. No. 4 of 1957, on dentical facts, in another original petition, O.P. No. 43 of 1956 on the file of the Districts Miasm Court, Tanjore Panchapkesa Ayyar J. has held that the proper way of deciding the questions arising under such independent statutes like the Madras Act 111 of 1922 will be in original''. partitions. I am not able to see how it makes any difference, whether it is an O P or on interlocutory application. The other view, namely that the application should be an interlocutory application in the suit is equally possible particularly when the statute itself does not prescribe the form of the application whether it should be an original petition or an interlocutory application. However in a matter of this kind, it is better that a uniform practice is followed, and this is not a matter for expressing any opinion different from that already expressed by another learned Judge, Following the decision of Panchapakosa Ayyar J. in C.R.P. No. 4 of 1957, this civil revision petition is dismissed without costs and all the other contentions of both the parties are left open to be decided in the original petition.