9911796707
TMI Blog1902 (12) TMI 1X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith respect to the same property, asking for similar relief against another attachment by another creditor. The two suits were heard together, and the Subordinate Judge held that the appellant had failed to prove the genuineness of his purchase, and accordingly dismissed both suits on June 25, 1894. 3. The present suit had originally been valued at a sum under ₹ 5000, while the second suit was valued at a sum over ₹ 5000. After the decision by the Subordinate Judge of the two suits against the appellant he filed an appeal in each case. In the second case he correctly valued the appeal above ₹ 5000, and filed the appeal in the High Court, the proper tribunal to entertain it. But in the present suit, by an unfortunate err ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isers may have laboured under prior to August 9, 1895, on that day, at all events, their attention was distinctly called to the mistake which had been made, and to the consequent difficulties in which the appellant was involved. 6. The next step taken was on September 16, 1895. By a petition verified on that date, and presented on behalf of the appellant, it was prayed that the memorandum of appeal, which had been filed in the District Court, might be admitted in the High Court and duly registered and numbered. An order to shew cause was issued in the terms of the petition, and this came on for argument on January 19, 1897. 7. At the time when this application was made to the High Court the period limited by law for appealing against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore whom it came held that, as to admitting the appeal to the High Court out of time, the matter was concluded by the decision of the Division Bench in discharging the order to shew cause on January 19, 1897, and, after considering the other points raised before them, they dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction. 11. Against this dismissal of the appeal to the High Court the present appeal has been brought, and has been heard ex parte. 12. It has been pressed upon their Lordships that the case is one of apparent hardship, inasmuch as, in two cases raising the same question on the merits, the appellant has a decree in his favour in one, and a decree against him in the other, and that, though the whole difficulty has arisen from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
