Skip to content


In Re: Ganapathi Pillai and ors. and Panchabakesa Iyer - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in15Ind.Cas.186
AppellantIn Re: Ganapathi Pillai and ors. and Panchabakesa Iyer
Excerpt:
provincial small cause courts act (ix of 1887), section 25 - finding opposed to evidence--power of high court to interfere in revision--acknowledgment of payment by one trustee without actual receipt of money--such acknowledgment not binding on the institution. - sundara aiyar, j.1. the only point urged in support of these petitions is that one of the trustees, panchapagesa iyer, having received the rent sued for and acknowledged the receipt of it, the plaintiff is not entitled to recover it again from the defendant. but the lower court has found that the rent was not really paid to panchapagesa iyer.2. it is stated that this conclusion is entirely opposed to the evidence, but i have no power to interfere even if that be so. i am also unable to hold that a mere acknowledgment of payment by one of the trustees who did not really receive the money can in any way bind the institution. i dismiss the petitions.
Judgment:

Sundara Aiyar, J.

1. The only point urged in support of these petitions is that one of the trustees, Panchapagesa Iyer, having received the rent sued for and acknowledged the receipt of it, the plaintiff is not entitled to recover it again from the defendant. But the lower Court has found that the rent was not really paid to Panchapagesa Iyer.

2. It is stated that this conclusion is entirely opposed to the evidence, but I have no power to interfere even if that be so. I am also unable to hold that a mere acknowledgment of payment by one of the trustees who did not really receive the money can in any way bind the institution. I dismiss the petitions.


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