Kunhi Marakkar Haji Vs. Kutti Umma - Court Judgment
|Judge||Subramania Ayyar and; Davies, JJ.|
|Appellant||Kunhi Marakkar Haji|
|Cases Referred||Ramachandra Goivind Manik v. Sono Sadashiv Sarkhot I.L.R.|
civil procedure code - act xiv of 1882, section 574--contents of appellate judgment--duty of appellate court to examine the correctness of a finding in the absence of a memorandum of objections. - .....on the matter in question. there is therefore no judgment as prescribed by the code. we must, therefore, reverse the decree and remand the appeal to be disposed of according to law. see umed ah v. salima bibi i.l.r. 6 all. 383 mumtaz begam v. fateh husain i.l.r. 6 all. 391 bhagvan v. kesur kuverji i.l.r. 17 bom. 428 and see also ramachandra goivind manik v. sono sadashiv sarkhot i.l.r. 19 bom. 551. costs will abide and follow the result.
1. Albeit there may have been no memorandum of objections, it was incumbent on the Judge to examine into the correctness of the finding and come to a conclusion whether he accepted it or not, unless its correctness had been admitted by the party to whom it was adverse, viz., the defendant in this case. There is nothing to show there was such admission, and the Judge has not expressed any opinion on the matter in question. There is therefore no judgment as prescribed by the Code. We must, therefore, reverse the decree and remand the appeal to be disposed of according to law. See Umed Ah v. Salima Bibi I.L.R. 6 All. 383 Mumtaz Begam v. Fateh Husain I.L.R. 6 All. 391 Bhagvan v. Kesur Kuverji I.L.R. 17 Bom. 428 and see also Ramachandra Goivind Manik v. Sono Sadashiv Sarkhot I.L.R. 19 Bom. 551. Costs will abide and follow the result.