Skip to content


Kadari Bhagavanulu Vs. Kokanada Narayanasawmy and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in4Ind.Cas.1072
AppellantKadari Bhagavanulu
RespondentKokanada Narayanasawmy and anr.
Cases Referred and Krishna Aiyengar v. Appanayangar
Excerpt:
civil procedure code(act xiv of 1882), section 561 - civil procedure code (act v of 1908), order 41, rule 22--memo. of objections against co-respondents--maintainability. - 1. it is argued that a memorandum of objections by a respondent cannot be of avail against a co-respondent. this question is concluded by a series of decisions in kulaikoda pillai v. viswanatha pillai 28 m.k 229 and c.r.p. no. 322 of 1903 and krishna aiyengar v. appanayangar 17 m.l.j. 62 the new code has made the matter abundantly clear, rule 22 of order 41--and we are not inclined to re-open a course of decisions in this presidency on a rule of procedure which has since been expressly accepted by the legislature even if there should be any ground to doubt its correctness.2. on the finding, the decision of the district judge is right; we dismiss the second appeal with costs--two sets.
Judgment:

1. It is argued that a memorandum of objections by a respondent cannot be of avail against a co-respondent. This question is concluded by a series of decisions in Kulaikoda Pillai v. Viswanatha Pillai 28 M.k 229 and C.R.P. No. 322 of 1903 and Krishna Aiyengar v. Appanayangar 17 M.L.J. 62 The new Code has made the matter abundantly clear, Rule 22 of Order 41--and we are not inclined to re-open a course of decisions in this Presidency on a rule of procedure which has since been expressly accepted by the legislature even if there should be any ground to doubt its correctness.

2. On the finding, the decision of the District Judge is right; we dismiss the Second Appeal with costs--two sets.


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