JEREMIAH et al , Appellant, and RAPIELPILLAI et al , Respondent

050-NLR-NLR-V-47-JEREMIAH-et-al-Appellant-and-RAPIELPILLAI-et-al-Respondent.pdf


Jeremiah v. Itapielpillai.
143
1946Present : Soertsz S.P.J.
JEREMIAH, et al., Appellants, and RAPIELPILLAI, et al.,Respondents.
184—C. R. Mallakam, 12,317.
Appeal—Duty of appellant to furnish Court with typescript copies of allnecessary documents.
An appellant should see that the typescript copies prepared for theCourt of Appeal contain all the documents necessary for a considerationof his appeal.
A
PPEAR from a judgment of the Commissioner of Requests,Mallakam.
N. Nadarajah, K.C. (with him H. W. Thambiah and N. Kumarasingharri)for the plaintiffs, appellants.
S. Nadesan (with him N. Nadarasa), for the defendants, respondents.
Cur. adv. will.
(1902) a N. U R. H2.
144
SOERTSZ S.P.JJeremiah v. Rapielpillai.
February 14, 1946. Soertsz S.P.J.—
The appellants have preferred an appeal in a caso regarding a rightof way, and have not condescended to placo before me the two mostimportant documents in the ease, namely P 1 and P 2. They probablyexpect me to look at the original record to acquaint myself with mapsand plans. This I refuse to do. It is for an appellant to see that thetypescript copies prepared for the Court of Appeal contain all thedocuments necessary for a consideration of his appeal.
I see no reason to disturb the findings of the Commissioner.
I dismiss the appeal with costs.
Appeal dismissed.