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


Madras High Court
Sitharama Sastrulu And Ors. vs Suryanarayana Sastri on 1 April, 1898
Equivalent citations: (1898) 8 MLJ 183


JUDGMENT

1. We are unable to accept the judgment of the lower appellate Court as one made in conformity with the law as laid down in Section 574, Civil Procedure Code. There is no express statement of the points for determination or of the decision on such points or the reasons for the decision. All we find is a general reference to the Munsif’s judgment as containing the views of the Judge. Such a general and wholesale adoption of the judgment of the Court of first instance cannot be considered as a sufficient compliance with the law. The judgment of the appellate Court should show on the face of it that the points in dispute were clearly before the mind of the Judge and that he exercised his own discrimination in deciding them. There is no indication that such was the case here. We must, therefore, reverse the lower appellate Court’s decree, and direct that the appeal be restored to the file and disposed of according to law.

2. Costs will abide and follow the result.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

102 queries in 0.182 seconds.