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
10 paragraphs · 217 wordsOn the facts stated by the District Judge we are of opinion that the suit is sustainable. We are unable to accept the view taken by the learned
Judges in the case Kunhiamma v. Kunhunni ILR 16 Mad. 140.
In our opinion the proviso to Section 42 of the Specific Relief Act does not operate so as to take away from a party against whom an order has
been made under Sections 280, 281 or 282 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the special right conferred by Section 28-3 to sue for a declaration of
his title in so far as it is affected by the order which he seeks to impeach.
We think the law on this question was correctly laid down by Muttusami Iyer, J., in his judgment in Ambu v. Ketlilamma ILR 14 Mad. 23.
JUDGMENT
We cannot accede to the argument now urged before us that there was no order u/s 282 of the CPC against the appellant, and therefore no
basis for a declaratory suit u/s 283 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In accordance With the decision of the Full Bench we set aside the decree of
the lower Appellate Court and remand the appeal for disposal on the merits. Courts will abide and follow the result.