AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
1 paragraphs · 111 words
Srinivasa Aiyangar, J.—The decisions of this Court in Ramanadan Chetti v. Periatambi Shervai 6 M.k 250 and Gurrala Seshayya v. Yedida Venkatasubbiah 29 Ind. Cas. 16; 28 M.L.J. 494; 2 L.W. 540 are clear authorities for the position that an execution application which is presented but returned for amendment and not re-presented within the time limited, is sufficient to save limitation so far as a subsequent execution application is concerned. The District Munsif is, therefore, wrong in dismissing this execution application on the ground that it was barred by limitation. I reverse his order and remand the petition to be disposed of according to law. The costs will abide the result.