Skip to content


Veerasamy Chetty Vs. Liladhara Vyass - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported in(1898)8MLJ110
AppellantVeerasamy Chetty
RespondentLiladhara Vyass
Excerpt:
- 1. we think that the judge has misunderstood the scope of section 315. of the code of civil procedure.2. the fact that the purchase-money was handed over to the small cause court under an attachment issued by that court makes no difference. the person who paid the purchase-money is entitled under section 315 to recover the same by way of execution from the person who has actually received it. the fact that the small cause court was the medium through which the money reached the hands of the party proceeded against, cannot affect the rights or liabilities of the parties under section 315.3. we must, therefore, set aside the order of the judge and direct that the petition be restored to his file and disposed of according to law. the petitioner must have his costs in both courts.
Judgment:

1. We think that the Judge has misunderstood the scope of Section 315. of the Code of Civil Procedure.

2. The fact that the purchase-money was handed over to the Small Cause Court under an attachment issued by that Court makes no difference. The person who paid the purchase-money is entitled under Section 315 to recover the same by way of execution from the person who has actually received it. The fact that the Small Cause Court was the medium through which the money reached the hands of the party proceeded against, cannot affect the rights or liabilities of the parties under Section 315.

3. We must, therefore, set aside the order of the Judge and direct that the petition be restored to his file and disposed of according to law. The petitioner must have his costs in both Courts.


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