Venkobachar Vs. Raghavandrachar

Venkobachar vs Raghavandrachar

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jan 31, 1908

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/774368

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/774368
Court: Chennai
Decided On: Jan 31, 1908
Subject: Limitation

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Key legal issue: Limitation

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Venkobachar

Respondent

Raghavandrachar

Legal References

Reported In: (1908)18MLJ96

Excerpt

- 1. the district judge has dismissed the application as barred by limitation. the appellant's case is that he never had any notice of the appeal. the return on the notice is that it was tendered to the younger brother of the appellant. under section 82 of the civil procedure code it was the duty of the court before proceeding with the appeal to declare that the notice had been duly served. this the court, as the record shows, did not do, and without such declaration there is no sufficient service. if, in fact, the appellant had no notice of the appeal, article 169 of schedule ii of the limitation act can have no application. we, therefore, set aside the order of the district judge and remand the case for disposal on the merits. costs will abide and follow the result.

Full Judgment

1. The District Judge has dismissed the application as barred by limitation. The appellant's case is that he never had any notice of the appeal. The return on the notice is that it was tendered to the younger brother of the appellant. Under Section 82 of the Civil Procedure Code it was the duty of the Court before proceeding with the appeal to declare that the notice had been duly served. This the Court, as the record shows, did not do, and without such declaration there is no sufficient service. If, in fact, the appellant had no notice of the appeal, Article 169 of Schedule II of the Limitation Act can have no application. We, therefore, set aside the order of the District Judge and remand the case for disposal on the merits. Costs will abide and follow the result.

Same Parties Venkobachar vs Raghavandrachar Same Subject Limitation

Limitation