Krishnan Nayar Vs. Ittinan Nayar

Krishnan Nayar vs ittinan Nayar

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Apr 16, 1901

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/783544

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/783544
Court: Chennai
Judge: Shephard and ;Davies, JJ.
Decided On: Apr 16, 1901
Subject: Civil

Case Summary

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

Civil Procedure Code - Act XIV of 1882, Sections 336, 349--Release of judgment-debtor on finding a surety for his production at a specified time--Death of judgment-debtor before the expiration of that time--Release of surety --Execution of decree as against surety--Illegality. -

Key legal issue: Civil

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Krishnan Nayar

Respondent

ittinan Nayar

Legal References

Reported In: (1901)ILR24Mad637

Excerpt

civil procedure code - act xiv of 1882, sections 336, 349--release of judgment-debtor on finding a surety for his production at a specified time--death of judgment-debtor before the expiration of that time--release of surety --execution of decree as against surety--illegality. - 1. it is impossible to support the order. either the order was wholly illegal for want of jurisdiction in the court, or, if the security was legally taken, the obligation was discharged by the death of the judgment-debtor. in our opinion the courts had no jurisdiction to enforce the obligation as a decree, and therefore, treating the appeal as a petition under section 622 of the coda of civil procedure, we set aside the orders of the courts below. the respondent must pay the petitioner's cost throughout.

Full Judgment

1. It is impossible to support the order. Either the order was wholly illegal for want of jurisdiction in the Court, or, if the security was legally taken, the obligation was discharged by the death of the judgment-debtor. In our opinion the Courts had no jurisdiction to enforce the obligation as a decree, and therefore, treating the appeal as a petition under Section 622 of the Coda of Civil Procedure, we set aside the orders of the Courts below. The respondent must pay the petitioner's cost throughout.

Same Parties Krishnan Nayar vs ittinan Nayar Same Subject Civil Same Judge Shephard and ;Davies, JJ.

Civil