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 · 143 wordsWaller, J.—A preliminary objection is taken that the High Court should not interfere u/s 115, Civil P. C., in a case of this kind. That was the
view taken by Phillips, J., in Acha v. Sankaran A. I. R. 1926 Mad. 768 No doubt, other Judges of this Court have taken a different view, but, with
all respect, I prefer to follow Phillips, J. Petitioner has other remedies open to him and it is, I think, no answer to say that the appropriate remedy is
more cumbrous than that he seeks to obtain by way of revision.
Assuming that I can interfere in such a matter in revision, I am unable to see how any question of jurisdiction arises.
The lower Court may be wrong, but it had jurisdiction to pass the order it did. The petition is dismissed with costs.