Skip to content


Palamalai Padayachi and anr. Vs. Shanmuga Ausari - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1894)ILR17Mad302
AppellantPalamalai Padayachi and anr.
RespondentShanmuga Ausari
Excerpt:
hereditary office - (madras) regulation vi of 1831, section 3--jurisdiction of revenue courts. - - 1. this is clearly a suit within section 3 of the regulation, and we mast, therefore, answer the question in the affirmative.1. this is clearly a suit within section 3 of the regulation, and we mast, therefore, answer the question in the affirmative. there is no necessary conflict between the two cases cited in the order of reference.
Judgment:

1. This is clearly a suit within Section 3 of the Regulation, and we mast, therefore, answer the question in the affirmative. There is no necessary conflict between the two cases cited in the order of reference.


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