Skip to content


Ratan Krishen Poddar Vs. Raghoo Nath Shaha and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1882)ILR8Cal287
AppellantRatan Krishen Poddar
RespondentRaghoo Nath Shaha and ors.
Excerpt:
mofussil small cause courts act (xi of 1865), section 21 - practice--(sic)--new trial--review--civil procedure code (act x of 1877), section 623. - richard garth, c.j.1. in this case, i think that the munsif has taken a correct view of both points.2. the notice-clause in section 21 of act xi of 1865 appears to me to be applicable only to those cases where a new trial cannot be applied for within seven days after the judgment, in consequence of there being no sitting of the court. where the application itself is made within seven days, the notice appears quite unnecessary. then again, if the grounds upon which the new trial is moved are proper grounds for granting a review, i agree with the munsif that the plaintiff has a right to apply under section 623 of the civil procedure code without resorting to the act of 1865. in that case no notice would be required.
Judgment:

Richard Garth, C.J.

1. In this case, I think that the Munsif has taken a correct view of both points.

2. The notice-clause in Section 21 of Act XI of 1865 appears to me to be applicable only to those cases where a new trial cannot be applied for within seven days after the judgment, in consequence of there being no sitting of the Court. Where the application itself is made within seven days, the notice appears quite unnecessary. Then again, if the grounds upon which the new trial is moved are proper grounds for granting a review, I agree with the Munsif that the plaintiff has a right to apply under Section 623 of the Civil Procedure Code without resorting to the Act of 1865. In that case no notice would be required.


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