[1] It is objected that in this case there were two appeals to the District Judge from the original, decree of the District Munsif and that therefore there should be two second appeals to this Court. The District Judge, however, very properly heard the two appeals together and passed one judgment and one decree only upon both appeals.
[2] The rules of this Court (Rule 105) lay down the practice that when there are two appeals from the same decree they should, if possible, be heard together and only one decree passed.
[3] Here there is only one appeal entered, and we think that the course adopted is right and that there was no necessity to enter two appeals, and even if two appeals had been entered the proper course would have been to hear them together and to pass one decree. - See also Krishnama Ghariar v. Mangammal (1902) L.R. 26 M. at p. 97.
Gangulakurti Sanyasi Lingam v. Nidugonda Gavaramma, Wife Of Mallayya
Gangulakurti Sanyasi Lingam v. Nidugonda Gavaramma, Wife Of Mallayya
(High Court Of Judicature At Madras)
Second Appeal No. 664 Of 1903 | 26-04-1906
Advocate List
Bench
- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BODDAM
- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANKARAN NAIR
Eq Citations
- (1906) 16 MLJ 411
- LQ/MadHC/1906/50
Head Note
Practice and Procedure — Second appeal — Joinder of appeals — Hearing of two appeals together — Passing of one decree — Proper course — Rules of Supreme Court, R. 105 (Para 2)
