T.R.M. Arunachellam Chetti vs V.R.R.M.A.R. Arunachellam Chetti And ... on 29 September, 1891
8. The respondent based his case on waiver by the appellant, contending that the appellant must have known about the sales of his own property in the prior mortgage suit, and about the disposal of the purchase monies ; that accordingly when he waived his right to a fresh proclamation, he must be taken to have accepted the statements in the existing proclamation and to have waived his right to object to them, and reliance was placed upon the decisions of this Board in Girdhari Singh v. Hurdeo Narain Singh (1876) L.R. 3 I.A. 230 and in T. Rule Arunachellam Chetti v. V.R.R.M.A.R Arunachellam Chetti (1888) L.R. 15 I.A. 171 : I.L.R. 12 Mad. 19.