Advanced Search Results
Queen-empress Vs. Viraperumal
Chennai
Arthur J.H. Collins, Kt., C.J. and ;Parker, J.
Dec-05-1892
Criminal
(1893)ILR16Mad105
Arthur J.H. Collins, Kt., C.J.1. The accused Viraperumal Asari has been convicted of the murder of a boy named Vellayan, aged three years, on the 3rd June 1892 and sentenced to death. Viraperumal Asari was on...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskVaikunta Prabhu and anr. Vs. MoidIn Saheb and ors.
Chennai
Parker, J.
Sep-23-1891
Civil
(1892)ILR15Mad89
Parker, J.1. In the execution of Small Cause Suit No. 417 of 1885 on the Mangalore District Munsif's file, the defendants applied to be declared insolvents. This application was filed as Insolvency Suit No. 7 of...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskMuthusami Ayyar Vs. Natesa Ayyar and ors.
Chennai
Parker, J.
Nov-19-1894
Civil
(1895)ILR18Mad464
Parker, J.1. The decree in Original Suit No. 50 of 1891 allowed one set of costs and vakil's fee (Rs. 304-6-3) to defendants Nos. 1-3 and 10-18, and this is an application by defendants Nos. 2...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask18-section briefs on any result in this list
Thiagaraya and ors. Vs. Krishnasami
Chennai
Arthur J.H. Collins, Kt., C.J. ;and Parker, J.
Feb-09-1892
Criminal
ILR1893NULL214
Arthur J.H. Collins, Kt., C.J.1. The accused were convicted of the offence of defamation under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code, and the question I have to decide is whether the evidence is sufficient to...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskSrinivasa Vs. Annasami and ors.
Chennai
Arthur J.H. Collins, Kt., C.J. and ;Parker, J.
Mar-22-1892
Criminal
(1892)ILR15Mad323
Arthur J.H. Collins, Kt., C.J.1. The points that are to be decided in this case are, first, upon the evidence taken by the District Magistrate is there a prima facie case disclosed against the accused under...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskThanikachella and anr. Vs. Shudachella
Chennai
Parker, J.
Nov-12-1891
PropertyCivil
(1892)ILR15Mad258
1. The case quoted by the Subordinate Judge was under the Revenue Recovery Act, not under Act VIII of 1865.2. The suit, however, is not for rent, but for contribution on account of a payment made...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskRaman Vs. Muppil Nayar and ors.
Chennai
Arthur J.H. Collins, Kt., C.J. and ;Parker, J.
Mar-20-1891
Civil
(1891)ILR14Mad478
1. As the plaintiff has never been brought on the record as decree-holder in Suit No 247 of 1885, it is clear that the provisions of Section 244 of the Code of Civil Procedure cannot apply...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskSankaralingam Chetti Vs. Subban Chetti and anr.
Chennai
Arthur J.H. Collins, C.J. and ;Parker, J.
Mar-29-1894
Family
(1894)ILR17Mad479
1. The question in issue is whether there has been a valid and legal divorce between plaintiff and second defendant, the District Judge finds in the affirmative.2. The only point argued before us is whether the...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAdipurnam Pillai Vs. D'Sena and Ors.
Chennai
Arthur J.H. Collins, C.J. and ;Parker, J.
Aug-09-1895
Company
(1896)ILR19Mad85
1. This is an appeal from an order of Mr. Justice Shephard disposing of an application under Section 182 of the Indian Companies Act in the matter of the Madras Building Association (Limited).2. The Madras Building...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskThama Vs. Kondan and ors.
Chennai
Arthur J.H. Collins, Kt., C.J. and ;Parker, J.
Mar-09-1892
Civil
(1892)ILR15Mad378
1. We think that the recital of the admission in the judgment C was a relevant fact as evidence of the jenmi's title under Section 35 of the Evidence Act fsee Lekraj Kuar v. Mahpal Singh...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »