SELLAMMAL Vs. VELAPPA NAICKER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard arguments on both sides we think that the appellant was not prejudiced by the refusal of the District Judge to accede to her request for adjournment. There is no reason to disturb the order for the appointment of a receiver and we dismiss the appeal No. 177 with costs.

(2.) As regards the memorandum of objections we think that Section 590 of the Civil Procedure Code makes applicable the procedure of Section 561 to appeals from orders and the memorandum of objections will lie - vide Kausalia V/s. Gulab Kuar (1899) I.L.R 21 A. 297. Objection is taken to the District Judge's order allowing a maintenance allowance to the appellant. The appellant is not entitled to any allowance for her maintenance and the order must be set aside.

(3.) The memorandum of objections is allowed with costs.