Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Narayanamma Vs. Kamakshamma

Narayanamma vs Kamakshamma

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Oct 22, 1896
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/776981

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Civil

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Civil Procedure Code, Sections 617, 647 - Village Court's Act (Madras)--Act I of 1889 Section 13, provison 3--Land 'includes' house. - - 48 of 1894, BEST, J. In the absence of any ground for putting such a limited construction on the term in question, it should, we think, be understood in its ordinary sense which ...

Key legal issue
Civil

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Narayanamma

Respondent

Kamakshamma

Legal References

Reported In
(1897)ILR20Mad21

Excerpt

civil procedure code, sections 617, 647 - village court's act (madras)--act i of 1889 section 13, provison 3--land 'includes' house. - - 48 of 1894, best, j. in the absence of any ground for putting such a limited construction on the term in question, it should, we think, be understood in its ordinary sense which of course includes land not covered by buildings as well as that so covered.1. the house-rent in question was not alleged to be due upon a written contract signed by the defendant'. the case therefore, falls under proviso 3 to section 13 of act i of 1889, which lays down that a village munsif cannot entertain a suit for' rent of land, unless such rent is due upon a written contract signed by the defendant. in civil revision petition no. 48 of 1894, best, j., held the proviso to be inapplicable to a claim for house-rent. but we are unable to agree with the learned judge, as we see nothing in the language of the proviso or in the reason for the enactment thereof to make us suppose that the term ' land ' is used in a restricted sense excluding land built upon from the operation of the proviso. in the absence of any ground for putting such a limited construction on the term in question, it should, we think, be understood in its ordinary sense which of course includes land not covered by buildings as well as that so covered. it follows that the village munsif had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit, and-, the conclusion of the district munsif is right.

Full Judgment

1. The house-rent in question was not alleged to be due upon a written contract signed by the defendant'. The case therefore, falls under proviso 3 to Section 13 of Act I of 1889, which lays down that a village Munsif cannot entertain a suit for' rent of land, unless such rent is due upon a written contract signed by the defendant. In Civil Revision Petition No. 48 of 1894, BEST, J., held the proviso to be inapplicable to a claim for house-rent. But we are unable to agree with the learned Judge, as we see nothing in the language of the proviso or in the reason for the enactment thereof to make us suppose that the term ' land ' is used in a restricted sense excluding land built upon from the operation of the proviso. In the absence of any ground for putting such a limited construction on the term in question, it should, we think, be understood in its ordinary sense which of course includes land not covered by buildings as well as that so covered. It follows that the village Munsif had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit, and-, the conclusion of the District Munsif is right.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial