SIVAKAMI ACHI Vs. NARAYANA CHETTIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE ground on which the application was turned down by the lower Court that an application under Order 39, Rule 1(a) of the Civil P. C. could not be made on behalf of a defendant is erroneous. If the learned Subordinate Judge had taken the trouble of reading Order 39, Rule 1(a) of the Civil P. C., he would have come to a different conclusion. I would now draw his attention to the words by any party used in the section. THEy would include the plaintiff and if any such act is committed by the plaintiff it is only the defendant who would have come to the Court with a complaint. Again the ruling in Karori Chand V/s. Maharaj Bahadur Singh (1916) 1 Pat. L.J. 560, does not support the proposition for which it has been quoted. If the lower Court had bestowed a little more attention to the ruling and not to the words used in the head notes this appeal would not have been necessary.

(2.) THE order passed by the lower Court must be set aside and the application would now be disposed of by the lower Court in accordance with law. THE costs in this Court will abide the result of the petition in the lower Court.