Skip to content


Chakrapani Padhi and ors. Vs. Krushno Naiko - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported inAIR1926Mad620; 95Ind.Cas.128
AppellantChakrapani Padhi and ors.
RespondentKrushno Naiko
Cases Referred and Kachu v. Trimbak Khemchand
Excerpt:
- waller, j.1. assuming that second appeal lies, which is more than doubtful vide asimuddi sheik v. sundari bibi [1911] 38 cal. 339 and kachu v. trimbak khemchand [1920] 44 bom. 472, no ground has been made out for interference. it is impossible to treat the lodgment schedule as an application of the nature contemplated by order 21, rule 89, code of civil procedure, 1908. there must be something more than a deposit.
Judgment:

Waller, J.

1. Assuming that second appeal lies, which is more than doubtful vide Asimuddi Sheik v. Sundari Bibi [1911] 38 Cal. 339 and Kachu v. Trimbak Khemchand [1920] 44 Bom. 472, no ground has been made out for interference. It is impossible to treat the lodgment schedule as an application of the nature contemplated by Order 21, Rule 89, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. There must be something more than a deposit.


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