High CourtsDivision Bench(1893) 01 MAD CK 0004

Rajah of Venkatagiri vs Yerra Reddi

Madras High Court · Decided on 10 January 1893 · Citation: (1893) ILR (Mad) 323

HON’BLE JUDGES
Parker, J · Arthur J.H. Collins, J

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 162 words
1.

We are of opinion that the suit is not sustainable u/s 49 of the Rent Recovery Act. The prayer of the plaint is not for damages, but for the release

and restoration of specific moveable property, together with some other subsidiary relief. The Revenue Court in which the suit was instituted is one

of special and limited jurisdiction, and no such suit as the present will lie u/s 49.

2.

It might have been open to the plaintiff to prefer a petition u/s 32 for the release of the property, but in that case there would be no appeal.

3.

The suit must, therefore, fail; but as this point was not taken before the District Judge, and on the facts found the conduct of the defendants has

not been free from blame, we shall not award costs in their favour.

4.

The decree of the District Court must be reversed and the suit dismissed, each party bearing his own costs throughout