appeal no similar provision was made for revision. They drew sustenance from Kunhammad Haji v. Emperor , AIR 1923 Mad 426 where Oldfield, J., held that
appeal no similar provision was made for revision. They drew sustenance from Kunhammad Haji v. Emperor AIR 1923 Mad 426 where Oldfield, J., held that
statutory right, leave of the Court is not necessary: Pokker v. Kunhammad 6 A.I.R. 1919 Mad. 257 Labh Singh
High Court in the case of Edakkavil Karimbuvalappil Abdulkhader Haji v. Thalakkal Kunhammad and Ors. , wherein the very same point had come up for consideration
decision was overruled by the Full Bench in the case of T. Kunhammad v. Narayanan Nambudri , .
10. To my mind the trial Court had every