Madras High Court
Kulasekara Naicker And Ors. vs Jagadambal Ammal And Ors. on 18 February, 1919
Equivalent citations: 50IND. CAS.14
JUDGMENT
1. Accepting the interpretation put upon the word 'judgment' in Clause 15 of the Letters Patent in Tuljaram Row v. Alagappa Chettiar 8 Ind. Cas. 340 : 35 M. 1 : 21 M.L.J. 1 :8 M.L.T. 453 (1910) M.W.N. 697, the most recent decision on the subject of a Full Bench of this Court, we think that an order as to costs is not the less a judgment within the meaning of Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, because it relates to costs only. We do not think that the observations of White, Chief Justice, in the later case in Numberumal Chettiar v. Krishnaji 22 Ind. Cas. 919 : 26 M.L.J. 356 : 15 M.L.T. 263 : (1914) M.W.N. 310 are opposed to this view. The one earlier decision of the Full Bench in Saravana Mudaliar v. Rajagapala Chetty 17 M.L.J. 569 was binding on the Bench in that case and the learned Chief Justice merely distinguished it by showing that it was inapplicable to the facts of that case. We answer the question in the affirmative.