Skip to content

(Thotapalli Sarvabhotla ) Venkata Chandikamba Vs. Indrakanti Viswanathamayya - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtPrivy Council
Decided On
Case NumberPrivy Council Appeal No. 48 of 1931(From Madras)
Appellant(Thotapalli Sarvabhotla ) Venkata Chandikamba
Respondentindrakanti Viswanathamayya
Advocates:Narasimham, for Appellant ; L. De Gruyther and A. Majid, for Respondent. Solicitors for Appellant, Hy. S.L. Polak and Co. ; Solicitors for Respondent, Harold Shepherd.
.....before this board, and, they will humbly advise his majesty that the appeal should be dismissed with costs and the decree of the high court affirmed. appeal dismissed.


The one point which is sought to be raised in this appeal by the appellant, who was plaintiff in the action, is a point which should, have been pleaded by him in his plaints and it has not been so pleaded. It has been pointed out that it required evidence to establish it, and no evidence has been called about it. It was not argued in the trial Judge's Court, nor was it argued before the High Court at the hearing of the appeal and cross-objections. The first time it was raised was on the application for review of the judgment of the High Court. Their Lordships are clearly of opinion that it is quite impossible to allow the appellant to raise the point without any pleadings and without any evidence before this Board, and, they will humbly advise His Majesty that the appeal should be dismissed with costs and the decree of the High Court affirmed.

Appeal dismissed.

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