Research › Browse › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

1915 DIGILAW 48 (MAD)

In Re: Tanguturu Sriramulu v. Unknown

1915-02-16

J.E.WALLIS, TROTTER

body1915
JUDGMENT 1. There is, we think, nothing in the allegation in paragraphs 7 and 8 of the affidavit. The plaintiff in the course of the case appears to have been vaunting the merits of his paper and the District Judge in answer observed that he did not make much of it or him. Mr. Cotton in the observations he has forwarded us very frankly admits that the observation, which was to some extent elicited by the observations of the plaintiff himself, who as a litigant in person no doubt assumed considerable latitude, was injudicious and it was no doubt thoughtlessly made, but we do not think it and the other allegations afford any serious ground for supposing that the plaintiff will not have a fair trial or for inducing him to think so. 2. The application is dismissed.