SUBBARAYADU Vs. CHENCHURAMAYYA
LAWS(PVC)-1900-10-7
PRIVY COUNCIL
Decided on October 11,1900

SUBBARAYADU Appellant
VERSUS
CHENCHURAMAYYA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) WE are told that the practice is, if a case is not reached on a given day, for fresh summons to witnesses to be required. This is altogether a mistake. Section 16 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure as well as the form of the summons itself shows that the possibility of witnesses being detained beyond one day has not been overlooked. The proper course was to warn the witnesses on the 10 that they would be required to appear on the 17 [see Proceedings of the Madras High Court dated 18 January 18705 M.H.C.R., Appx, xv, and other cases cited in Mayne's Criminal Law , page 85.]
(2.) WE must reverse the decree and remand the case. Costs will abide the result.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.