HARISCHANDRA DEO Vs. NARAYANA
LAWS(PVC)-1901-3-22
PRIVY COUNCIL
Decided on March 14,1901

HARISCHANDRA DEO Appellant
VERSUS
NARAYANA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Shephard, J - (1.) In my opinion the nature of the suit must be ascertained by considering all the allegations in the plaint and the prayer.
(2.) In the present plaint a muchalka is alleged to have been executed by the first defendant, and the second defendant is said to be in possession. There are no other allegations made.
(3.) Then there is the prayer as for the enforcement of a charge. There is nothing in the allegations to justify such a prayer. I therefore think that the plaint must be read simply as a plaint for the enforcement of the terms of the muchalka, and that the suit is therefore of a small cause nature.;


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