Skip to content


Umade Rajaha Raja Damara Kumara Thimmanayanim Bahadur Varu Vs. Sri Ranga Bhupala Bali Row Garu and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported in(1911)21MLJ464
AppellantUmade Rajaha Raja Damara Kumara Thimmanayanim Bahadur Varu
RespondentSri Ranga Bhupala Bali Row Garu and anr.
Excerpt:
- .....civil court.2. there is nothing in the language of section 47 of the court of wards act to support the contention that the last clause of section 325-a of the code of civil procedure, is only made applicable and it would be contrary to the manifest intention of the legislature so to hold.3. the conclusion is right and the appeal is dismissed with.....
Judgment:

1. We do not find it necessary to consider the point dealt with in the lower court, but think it clear that Section 325-A of the Code of Civil Procedure which is made applicable by Section 47 of the Madras Court of Wards Act, 1902, is sufficient to save limitation. Section 325-A expressly excludes from calculation the period during which the decree is before the Collector for execution and the exclusion is obviously made applicable to proceedings for execution in the civil court.

2. There is nothing in the language of Section 47 of the Court of Wards Act to support the contention that the last clause of Section 325-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, is only made applicable and it would be contrary to the manifest intention of the legislature so to hold.

3. The conclusion is right and the appeal is dismissed with costs.


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