Raman Vs. Sridharan and anr.

Raman vs Sridharan and anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Dec 01, 1892

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/795288

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/795288
Court: Chennai
Judge: Arthur J.H. Collins, Kt., C.J. and ;Best, J.
Decided On: Dec 01, 1892
Subject: Civil;Property

Case Summary

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

Civil Procedure Code - Act XIV of 1882, Section 43--Res judicata--Decree against three of four uralars of a devasom--Suit to declare the decree binding on the fourth. -

Key legal issue: Civil;Property

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Raman

Respondent

Sridharan and anr.

Legal References

Cases Referred: Nobin Chandra Roy v. Magantara Dassya I.L.R.
Reported In: (1893)ILR16Mad449

Excerpt

civil procedure code - act xiv of 1882, section 43--res judicata--decree against three of four uralars of a devasom--suit to declare the decree binding on the fourth. - 1. the only point for consideration in this appeal is whether the suit is barred by section 43 of the code of civil procedure. we are of opinion that it is not, for the reasons stated in nobin chandra roy v. magantara dassya i.l.r. 10 cal. 924 2. we set aside the decree and remand the appeal for disposal according to law.3. the costs will abide and follow the result.

Full Judgment

1. The only point for consideration in this appeal is whether the suit is barred by Section 43 of the Code of Civil Procedure. We are of opinion that it is not, for the reasons stated in Nobin Chandra Roy v. Magantara Dassya I.L.R. 10 Cal. 924

2. We set aside the decree and remand the appeal for disposal according to law.

3. The costs will abide and follow the result.

Same Parties Raman vs Sridharan and anr. Same Subject Civil;Property Same Judge Arthur J.H. Collins, Kt., C.J. and ;Best, J.

Civil;Property