Advanced Search Results
T.Ramasami and ors. Vs. Kuttakattu Ramasami Gounder and ors.
Chennai
T.Ramasami and ors.
Kuttakattu Ramasami Gounder and ors.
Jun-06-2011
Tenancy
Madras cultivating Tenants Protection Act; Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants Right to Purchase Land Owners' Rights Act; Tamil Nadu Agricultural Lands (Record of Tenancy Rights) Act
1. Since the subject matter and the parties in both the appeals are same, they are disposed of by this common judgment.2. Both the Second Appeals are directed respectively against the common judgment and decrees dated...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskRamasami Vs. Ramasami
Chennai
Ramasami
Ramasami
Jan-23-1882
Property
(1882)ILR5Mad115
1. Plaintiff sued to recover from defendant certain specified land in the village of Kiluveli of Kiliyanur which is equal to one-sixth of the land defendant holds. He said that on 21st November 1861 he entered...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskRamasami Chetti Vs. Ramasami Chetti and anr.
Chennai
Ramasami Chetti
Ramasami Chetti and anr.
Apr-19-1882
Civil
(1882)ILR5Mad220
Kindersley, J.1. This suit has been brought upon a hundi drawn by the defendant on his firm at Colombo. In the Courts below the objection was taken that the hundi, which was never presented for payment,...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask18-section briefs on any result in this list
Ramasamy and 4 ors. Vs. Ramasamy
Chennai
Ramasamy and 4 ors.
Ramasamy
Dec-24-1996
Civil
Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 10 and 100 - Order 2, Rule 2 - Order 6, Rules 1 and 2; Evidence Act - Sections 101
1997(3)CTC634
ORDERS.S. Subramani, J.1. Plaintiff in O.S. No. 171 of 1985, who lost in both the Courts below have come upto with this second appeal, challenging the correctness of the judgments of both the Courts.2. Between the...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskRamasamy Moopanar Vs. Ramasamy Moopanar
Chennai
Ramasamy Moopanar
Ramasamy Moopanar
Sep-17-1990
Civil
(1991)283MLJ1
ORDERSrinivasan, J.1. This revision petition is against the order of the executing Court directing the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 15,000 within 15 days from the date of order, failing which the petition shall...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskV.K. Ramasami Gounder and ors. Vs. P. Ramasami Gounder and ors.
Chennai
V.K. Ramasami Gounder and ors.
P. Ramasami Gounder and ors.
Sep-09-1996
Property
(1997)2MLJ223
ORDERRaju, J.1. The plaintiffs in O.S. No. 1934 of 1970, on the file of the Court of Additional District Munsif, Namakkal, are the appellants in the above second appeal. They filed the suit for declaration of...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskPaningapalli Ramasami Vs. Pentakota Ramasami
Chennai
Paningapalli Ramasami
Pentakota Ramasami
Apr-08-1891
Trust and Societies
(1892)2MLJ251
1. The District Munsif has found the plaintiff is the Archaka and that it is with his permission that the sites of houses in the village of Ramagiri are occupied. There is also an averment in...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskT.R. Narasimma Murthi Sastri Brought in Place of Ramasami Pillai Vs. A ...
Chennai
T.R. Narasimma Murthi Sastri Brought in Place of Ramasami Pillai
A.T.V. Ramasami Chettiar and anr.
Dec-19-1912
Civil
(1913)24MLJ91
1. This is a suit on a negotiable promissory note executed by the two defendants in the plaintiff's favour payable on demand. The plaintiff obtained a decree against both the defendants in the Munsif's Court and...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskRamasami Odayan Vs. P.M. Ramasami Odayan and ors.
Chennai
Ramasami Odayan
P.M. Ramasami Odayan and ors.
Oct-08-1909
Civil
5Ind.Cas.514
1. Sadasshiv Rayaji v. Maruti 14 B.k 455 is authority that a Vakil, unless specially empowered, cannot bring a suit to a close by offering to be bound by the oath of the opposite party in...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskR. Nallamuthu Gounder S/O Ramasamy Gounder Vs. V. Natarajan S/O Vaiyap ...
Chennai
R. Nallamuthu Gounder S/O Ramasamy Gounder
V. Natarajan S/O Vaiyapuri Mudaliar, ;pavathal W/O Kumarasami Gounder, ;r. Sengottaian S/O Ramasami
Sep-27-2002
Property
Specific Relief Act - Sections 34 and 42; Tamil Nadu Court Fees Act, 1955 - Sections 25 and 27
(2003)1MLJ158
K. Sampath, J. 1. At the time of admission of the second appeal, the following substantial questions of law were raised for decision:'1. Whether the suit for permanent injunction and mandatory injunction is not maintainable as...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›