Skip to content


Nanammai Vs. the Collector of Trichinopoly - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported in(1910)20MLJ97
AppellantNanammai
RespondentThe Collector of Trichinopoly
Cases ReferredMonessur Dass v. Beer Pratap Sahu
Excerpt:
- 1. the decree for maintenance is a right to future maintenance and under section 266(1) of the civil procedure code of 1882 cannot be attached. it is not a money decree and cannot be attached under section 273 of c.p.c. of 1882, as seems to have been done in this case. perhaps the proper procedure would be that laid down in monessur dass v. beer pratap sahu (1871) 15 w.r. 188. the appeal is allowed and the attachment set aside. there will be no costs.
Judgment:

1. The decree for maintenance is a right to future maintenance and under Section 266(1) of the Civil Procedure Code of 1882 cannot be attached. It is not a money decree and cannot be attached under Section 273 of C.P.C. of 1882, as seems to have been done in this case. Perhaps the proper procedure would be that laid down in Monessur Dass v. Beer Pratap Sahu (1871) 15 W.R. 188. The appeal is allowed and the attachment set aside. There will be no costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //