Skip to content


Trilochana Bakshi Vs. Brojo Patro - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported in(1902)12MLJ349
AppellantTrilochana Bakshi
RespondentBrojo Patro
Excerpt:
- 1. the facts in our opinion show that the plaintiff's legal cause of action was for trespass in the defendant's having wrongfully caused the plaintiff's house to be searched. the facts would not support an action for a malicious prosecution, inasmuch as the information given was only to the police, and the steps taken were only in a police investigation preparatory to a prosecution before a magistrate. so regarding the suit as one for damages for trespass, it is not exempted from the cognizance of a court of small causes, and as the damages claimed do not exceed rs. 500, no second appeal lies under section 586 of the code of civil procedure. this appeal is, therefore, rejected with costs.
Judgment:

1. The facts in our opinion show that the plaintiff's legal cause of action was for trespass in the defendant's having wrongfully caused the plaintiff's house to be searched. The facts would not support an action for a malicious prosecution, inasmuch as the information given was only to the police, and the steps taken were only in a police investigation preparatory to a prosecution before a Magistrate. So regarding the suit as one for damages for trespass, it is not exempted from the cognizance of a Court of Small Causes, and as the damages claimed do not exceed Rs. 500, no second appeal lies under Section 586 of the Code of Civil Procedure. This appeal is, therefore, rejected with costs.


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