Skip to content

Janaki Ammal Vs. Narayanaswami Iyer - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
Decided On
Reported in(1908)18MLJ589
AppellantJanaki Ammal
RespondentNarayanaswami Iyer
Cases ReferredRamanadhan Chetty v. Narayanan Chetty I.L.R.
- .....aside the order with costs in both.....

1. We think there is no appeal under Section 588, Clause (24), of C.P.C. - vide Rani Keshobati Kumari v. Mac Gregor 12 C.W.N. 648. We dismiss the appeal with costs.

2. But we have no doubt that the Subordinate Judge's decision to make the order is a judicial order he considers the question whether he has jurisdiction to make it and decides in favour of the jurisdiction) and one which can be revised under Section 622, C.P.C. We think the Subordinate Judge had no jurisdiction to call upon the first defendant to furnish accounts, She was appointed receiver by the High Court pending an appeal, and, in our opinion, no other Court had power to make any order or give any direction as supplementary to those given by the High Court, or without authority given by that Court. There was no proceeding pending before the Subordinate Judge - Ramanadhan Chetty v. Narayanan Chetty I.L.R. (1903) M. 602 - and the order of the High Court informing him of the appointment does not give him jurisdiction to give directions to the receiver.

3. We set aside the order with costs in both Courts.

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