Skip to content


In Re: Jami Kurmanna - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported in(1945)1MLJ268
AppellantIn Re: Jami Kurmanna
Excerpt:
- - if the appellant's failure to furnish the printed copies in the first instance is due to the fault of the lower court, time in his favour will probably be allowed;.....41-a, rule 2 of the code. if the appellant's failure to furnish the printed copies in the first instance is due to the fault of the lower court, time in his favour will probably be allowed; but this is a question which will require consideration only at some later stage. the power of dispensation contained in order 41, rule 1, does not extend to appeals presented to the high court, for which special provision has been made by the amended rules. the petition is ordered to be dismissed.
Judgment:
ORDER

Byers, J.

1. A typed copy of the lower Court's Order is insufficient and the appellant must produce the requisite number of printed copies of the Judgment in accordance with the mandatory provisions of Order 41-A, Rule 2 read with Order 43 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The words 'unless the Appellate Court dispenses therewith' contained in Order 41, Rule 1 of the Code are not found in the Madras rule, Order 41-A, Rule 2 of the Code. If the appellant's failure to furnish the printed copies in the first instance is due to the fault of the lower Court, time in his favour will probably be allowed; but this is a question which will require consideration only at some later stage. The power of dispensation contained in Order 41, Rule 1, does not extend to appeals presented to the High Court, for which special provision has been made by the amended rules. The petition is ordered to be dismissed.


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