BALASUBRAMANIAN CHETTIAR Vs. AL VR ST VEERAPPA CHETTIAR
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Click here to view full judgement.
Horwill, J. -
(1.) The plaintiff-appellant in these appeals sought to have the sale, brought about by his landlord for arrears of rent, set aside on the ground of fraud and material irregularity. Both the Courts below held against him and found that he had shown no cause for setting aside the sale. The suits were dismissed and in appeal the dismissals were confirmed. Then the plaintiff preferred second appeals to this Court.
(2.) Before the matter came on for consideration by Wadsworth J., in second appeal, Madras Act XVII  of 1946 had been passed, which required all suits to be stayed:
"Which were (a) for the eviction of tenants from their holdings or land .... in which a claim for such eviction was involved .... or (b) in which the sale of the holding of a tenant or ryot for recovery of rant is claimed."
(3.) The learned Judge did not think that there were any merits in the second appeals as far as the questions in issue in the suits were concerned; and he did not consider that Section 4 of the Act applied. As, however, the applicability of Section 4, had not been considered by this Court in any decided cases, the legislation being of very recent origin, he, in dismissing the appeal, granted a certificate for leave to appeal under the Letters Patent,;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.