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
8 paragraphs · 173 wordsSubramania Ayyar, J.—The District Judge passed an order directing that a certificate do issue in favour of the appellant, a minor under the
Court of Wards on security being given on his behalf. This appeal is against so much of the order as relates to security. The respondent takes the
preliminary objection that no appeal lies against that portion of the order which is appealed against.
Referring to a contention that an appeal lies in such cases, Muttusami Ayyar, J. in Sundara Ammal v. Kullappa Chetti Appeal against Order No.
15 of 1894, unreported observed as follows:
Having regard to the language of Section 19, it does not appear that an appeal is allowed. It suggests an intention to allow no appeal except as to
the grant of certificate as was held with reference to Act 27 of 1860 in Monmohinee Dassee v. Khetter Gopaul Dey ILR 1 Cal. 127. Following
this view I hold that the objection taken by the respondent is good. The appeal fails and is dismissed with costs.