AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Jackson, J.—In this case the appellant knew of the order passed by the Official Receiver rejecting the proof of her debt in 1926 by 1927
and did not appeal till 1930. She argues that her knowledge was immaterial so long as formal notice was not conveyed to her, under this Court''s
rules. None of the cases cited before us go so far as this; cf. Swaminathan v. Latchmanan I.L.R.(1929) 53 Mad. 491 : 59 M.L.J. 585 and
Secretary of State for India in Council v. Gopisetti Narayanasami Naidu I.L.R.(1910) 34 Mad. 491 : 59 M.L.J. 585. And it is clear from the
dictum of Blackburn, J., quoted on page 506 than an order is complete and appealable before notice is issued. When an order has been duly
issued, and a party is apprised of that order, time will run, even though it is directed that a notice of an order shall be sent.
The appeal is dismissed with costs.