Pandivi Satyanandam And Ors. vs Paramkusam Nammayya And Anr. on 6 October, 1937
2. At the hearing of the above appeal, Mr. Holla, the learned counsel appearing for the plaintiffs, raised a preliminary objection and that objection is that no appeal lies in this case. It is urged by him that no appeal could lie against an order passed by the lower court accepting the report of the Commissioner and allotting shares on the basis of that report by drawing lots, as had been done in this case. According to him, the decree in question was not a decree in the first instance and even if we construe it to be a decree, as it had not been engrossed on non-judicial stamp paper, no decree in law exists and hence the appeal is not maintainable. In support of his contention, he relied upon number of decisions. The first case is reported in Satyanandam v. Paramkusam Nammayya, (AIR 1938 Mad 307).