Posted On by &filed under High Court, Madras High Court.

Madras High Court
Erattakolam Melvittil Karnavan … vs K.P. Suppan Menon on 29 April, 1910
Equivalent citations: 7 Ind Cas 67
Bench: R Benson, K Aiyar


1. Item No. 1 is admittedly, in Cochin territory and was so on the date of this suit. The British Courts have no jurisdiction to entertain a suit for possession of that property. See Explanation to 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

2. We must modify the decree of the Courts below and dismiss the suit as regards item No. 1.

3. With reference to the mesne profits also the decree is modified, the profits of item No. 2 alone are to be ascertained in execution and given to the plaintiff. Each party will bear his own costs throughout.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

93 queries in 0.169 seconds.