High Courts

Bhimarazu Varadayya vs Manchukonda Nammalwar and Others

Madras High Court · Decided on 25 August 1909 · Citation: (1910) 20 MLJ 88

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 136 words
1.

The question is whether an unenfranchised inam can be attached and sold in execution of a decree of a Civil Court. We think it can. The

question must be settled by reference to Act XXIII of 1871 which consolidates the law relating to pensions and grants by Government of money

or land revenue. Now while Section 4 of the Act prevents a Civil Court from entertaining a suit relating to a pension or grant of money or land

revenue it has been thought necessary in Section 11 to state that certain pensions are not liable to attachment by the Civil Courts. The omission of

grants of money or land revenue is significant and shews clearly that under Act XXIII of 1871 such grants are not exempt from attachment.

2.

This appeal is dismissed wich costs.