Skip to content


Chandra Bhusan Gangopadhya Vs. Ram Kanth Banerji and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1885)ILR12Cal108
AppellantChandra Bhusan Gangopadhya
RespondentRam Kanth Banerji and anr.
Excerpt:
civil procedure code, 1882, sections 281, 283 - limitation act (xv of 1877), schedule ii, article 11--claim to attached property--regular suit. - .....means satisfied upon the investigation. there was no investigation in this case, the munsif having declined to make any investigation, remarking that the parties would not be prejudiced.2. we think, therefore, that the one-year's rule of limitation does not apply to he present case. we set aside the decree of the court below, and remand the case for trial on the merits.3. costs will follow the result.
Judgment:

Field, J.

1. We think the Judge in the Court below is wrong in this case. We have heard the order, dated 25th January 1879, and we think it cannot he treated as an order under Section 281 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The order contemplated by that section is an order made after the investigation mentioned in Section 278. Section 280 commences 'if upon the said investigation the Court is satisfied, &c.;' Section 281 begins, 'if the Court is satisfied, &c.;' 'Satisfied' clearly means satisfied upon the investigation. There was no investigation in this case, the Munsif having declined to make any investigation, remarking that the parties would not be prejudiced.

2. We think, therefore, that the one-year's rule of limitation does not apply to he present case. We set aside the decree of the Court below, and remand the case for trial on the merits.

3. Costs will follow the result.


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