Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.15 seconds)

A.P.T. Veerabhadra Pillai vs A.P.T. Shunmugam Pillai on 22 December, 1915

2. Petitioners have objected to this order on the ground that it was passed after admissible evidence, oral and documentary, had been excluded. But the view I take involves consideration only of two more substantial objections that (1) Sections 145 and 146 authorise no recognition of joint possession, (2) the lower Court did not decide, as the former section directs, which party was in possession on 23rd June 1917, the date of the preliminary order. The first of these objections is justified by the description in the sections of the different orders which can be passed and by reference to authority, the latest case being Veerabhadra Pillai v. Shunmugam Pillai 32 Ind. Cas.
Madras High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1