Skip to content


Kothandaramappa Vs. Subbanna and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported in(1900)10MLJ136
AppellantKothandaramappa
RespondentSubbanna and anr.
Cases ReferredCourt of Wards v. Rajah Leelanand Singh Bahadur
Excerpt:
- .....ramasoonderee dassee ghowdranee no doubt supports the contention of the respondents. on the other hand, the decision in court of wards v. rajah leelanand singh bahadur 2 supports the contrary view. it may be that the plaintiff might have so framed his action as to have made it obligatory on him to claim all the land which was wrongfully withheld. but i cannot, in the circumstances, say that he was bound to do so.2. we must reverse the decree of the lower appellate court and remand the appeal. the respondents must pay the costs of this appeal for appellant.davies, j.3. i see no reason to differ.
Judgment:

Shephard, J.

1. I cannot understand how it can he said that two distinct trespass as committed at different times on different parts of the same plot of land can be regarded as giving one cause of action only. The case of Jumoona Dassee Chowdranee v. Ramasoonderee Dassee Ghowdranee no doubt supports the contention of the respondents. On the other hand, the decision in Court of Wards v. Rajah Leelanand Singh Bahadur 2 supports the contrary view. It may be that the plaintiff might have so framed his action as to have made it obligatory on him to claim all the land which was wrongfully withheld. But I cannot, in the circumstances, say that he was bound to do so.

2. We must reverse the decree of the Lower Appellate Court and remand the appeal. The respondents must pay the costs of this appeal for appellant.

Davies, J.

3. I see no reason to differ.


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