High CourtsDivision Bench(1910) 07 MAD CK 0014

Umade Rajaha Raje Damara Kumara Thimmanayannu Bahadur Varu vs Sri Ranga Bhupala Bali Row Garu and Another

Madras High Court · Decided on 22 July 1910 · Citation: 7 Ind. Cas. 860

HON’BLE JUDGES
Wallis, J · Krishnaswami Aiyar, 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 · 143 words
1.

We do not find it necessary to consider the point dealt with in the lower Court, but think it clear that Section 325 A of the CPC which is made

applicable by Section 47 of the Madras Court of Wards Act, 1902, is sufficient to save limitation. Section 825 A expressly excludes ,from

calculation the period during which the decree is before the Collector for execution and the exclusion is obviously made applicable to proceedings

for execution in the Civil Court.

2.

There is nothing in the language of Section 47 of the Court of Wards Act to support the competition plot the last clause of Section 325A of the

CPC is one made applicable and it would be contrary to the manifest intention of the legislature so to hold.

3.

The conclusion is right and the appeal is dismissed with costs.