ETHIRAJULU Vs. SREERAMULU
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) AS regards the sum of Rs. 72-8-10, it appears that the contract between the parties was entered into in Kottapa-tam. The District Munsif of Ongole consequently had jurisdiction. AS regards the sum of Rs. 780, we are of opinion that the District Munsif had no jurisdiction. The jewels regarding which this claim has arisen were either wrongfully retained or concerted in Madras, and the suit regarding them consequently could not be filed in Ongole. The decree of the lower Courts will be modified accordingly. The plaintiff (respondent) and defendant (appellant) will pay and receive costs in proportion to the extent to which they have failed or succeeded.
(2.) THE memorandum of objections not having been moved, it is rejected.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.