Skip to content


Nittukaruppa Goundan Vs. Kumarasami Goundan and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil;Limitation
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported in(1898)8MLJ167
AppellantNittukaruppa Goundan
RespondentKumarasami Goundan and ors.
Cases ReferredPerumal Ayyan v. Alagirisami Bhagacathar
Excerpt:
- 1. we think that in this case the words construed by the sub-judge as 'when yon require' imply a condition as was also decided in a case where the words actually used were 'on demand.' (s. a 200 of 1897). there the words were not considered as merely technical words, as they were interpreted to be in perumal ayyan v. alagirisami bhagacathar, i. l. r., 20 m., 245. the sub-judge was therefore right in holding the suit was not barred, and this appeal is dismissed with costs.
Judgment:

1. We think that in this case the words construed by the Sub-Judge as 'when yon require' imply a condition as was also decided in a case where the words actually used were 'on demand.' (S. A 200 of 1897). There the words were not considered as merely technical words, as they were interpreted to be in Perumal Ayyan v. Alagirisami Bhagacathar, I. L. R., 20 M., 245. The Sub-Judge was therefore right in holding the suit was not barred, and this appeal is dismissed with costs.


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