Annapurnabai And Anr
v.
Ruprao
(Privy Council)
| 29-07-1924
Dunedin, J.
1. In the opinion of their Lordships the contention of the petitioners Counsel as to the effect of Section 110 of the Code of Civil Procedure is correct and the petitioners had a right of appeal. They should have special leave to appeal, but it should be limited to the question as to the maintenance allowance.
2. Their Lordships will humbly advise His Majesty accordingly.
1. In the opinion of their Lordships the contention of the petitioners Counsel as to the effect of Section 110 of the Code of Civil Procedure is correct and the petitioners had a right of appeal. They should have special leave to appeal, but it should be limited to the question as to the maintenance allowance.
2. Their Lordships will humbly advise His Majesty accordingly.
Advocates List
For Petitioner
- Shekhar Naphade
- Mahesh Agrawal
- Tarun Dua
For Respondent
- S. Vani
- B. Sunita Rao
- Sushil Kumar Pathak
Bench List
Dunedin, J.
Eq Citation
86 Ind. Cas. 504
AIR 1925 PC 60
LQ/PC/1924/57
HeadNote
Limitation Act, 1908 — S. 34 — C.P.C., 1908, S. 110 — Appeal against order of maintenance allowance — Limitation Act, 1908, S. 34, not applicable — Special leave to appeal granted
Thank you for subscribing! Please check your inbox to opt-in.
Oh no, error happened! Please check the email address and/or try again.