Madras High Court
Lingum Krishnabhupati Devu vs Kandula Sivaramayya on 16 October, 1896
Equivalent citations: (1897)ILR 20MAD366
JUDGMENT
1. A preliminary objection is taken on the ground that the order appealed against was passed under Section 243 of the Civil Procedure Code, and that no appeal lies against such an order. We do not think that this contention can be upheld. Following the reasoning and the rulings in.the cases of Ghazidin v. Fakir Bakhsh I.L.R. 7 AIL 73 Kassa Mai v. Gopi I.L.R. 10 AIL 389 Steel & Go. v. Ichchamoyi Chowdharain I.L.R. 13 Cal. 111 we hold that an appeal lies. We therefore disallow the preliminary objection.
2.As to the merits, the District Judge states that he does not consider that the appellant will have difficulty in recovering any sum that may now be paid over to the respondent in execution of the decree. The decree was passed as long ago as 1883. We dismiss this appeal with costs