Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.24 seconds)Section 10 in The Specific Relief Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Section 2 in The Specific Relief Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in The Specific Relief Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Section 11 in The Specific Relief Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Section 13 in The Specific Relief Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Section 21 in The Specific Relief Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Section 42 in The Specific Relief Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Robert Fischer And Ors. vs The Secretary Of State For India In ... on 23 November, 1908
8. The second question is whether a suit for a declaration that the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer is ultra vires and does not bind the plaintiff, is barrel by Section 42, Specific Relief Act. It is argued that, as according to the genealogical tree furnished by the proprietor himself the defendant and not the plaintiff is the next heir to the last holder of the office of karnam, the plaintiff is not entitled to the office under Sub-section 2, Section 10 and therefore the plaintiff has no legal character sufficient to sustain the action and the suit for the declaration therefore should have been dismissed by both the lower Courts. The argument was not put in this form in the lower Courts. What was argued there was that a suit of this nature for a declaration that the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer appointing the defendant karnam is ultra vires, is not maintainable and the lower Courts rightly overruled the objection pointing out that according to the decision of the Privy Council in Robert Fischer v. Secretary of State [1899] 22 Mad. 270 the suit is :