SUBBA NAIDU Vs. KANNIA NAIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C. M. P. No. 1065 is a petition for converting C. R. P. No. 1794 into a C. M. A. for reasons stated in the affidavit in support of the petition. The civil revision petition was filed in time and the requisite court-fee has been already paid. I therefore see no reason why this prayer for converting the C. R. P. into a C. M. A. should not be granted. I accordingly direct that the C. R. P. be converted into a C. M. A.

(2.) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is brought from the decree and the judgment of the District Judge, Chingleput in A. S. No. 97 of 1948 by defendants 1 and 2 in O. S. No. 226 of 1946. This litigation relates to a claim based on a promissory note executed by defendant 3 in favour of defendant 1 who assigned it to defendant 2. Defendant 3 executed a promissory note for a sum of Rs. 400 in favour of defendant 1 who assigned it to defendant 2. On the foot of this promissory note, a suit was instituted by defendant 2 in the Court of small causes at Madras and obtained a decree. When defendant 2 sought to execute his decree one Adi Ammal sister of defendant 1 instituted O. S. No. 226 of 1946 for a declaration that she was entitled to the sum due under the promissory note executed by defendant 3 in favour of defendant 1 as the amount was advanced by defendant 1 out of the funds belonging to her.

(3.) Pending this suit, this Adi Ammal died and the respondent herein filed an application for being impleaded as the legal representative of the deceased plaintiff alleging that under a will executed by his grandmother all the properties belonging to her, including the suit claim, were bequeathed to him and therefore he was entitled to represent the estate of the deceased plaintiff.