A E SUBRAMANIA AYYAR Vs. SSRAMASWAMI AYYAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter was decided against the appellant in the Courts below on a technicality. When the facts are fully understood, we are of the opinion that there is no reason why the technicality should prevail and that on the merits the decision should be in favour of the appellant.

(2.) The first respondent obtained a money-decree against the appellant in the Court of Small Causes, Madras and in execution proceedings in the City Civil Court attached a house belonging to the appellant. The first respondent holds a mortgage over this property as security for a loan of Rs. 1,000 granted by him to the appellant. The first respondent asked that the property be sold subject to his mortgage. It was sold on this condition on the 27th April, 1944 and was bought by the second respondent, who is the paternal uncle of the first respondent. The amount payable under the money decree was Rs. 217-12-6.

(3.) The City Civil Court closed for the summer vacation on the 1 May, 1944, that is, three days after the sale. It reopened on the 1 July, 1944, which was a Saturday and a bank holiday. We have ascertained that it is the practice of the City Civil Court Judge to sit for a short time on the reopening day, but he does not post any cases for hearing. On Saturdays the office of the Court is closed at 2 p.m.