Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Plaintiff: mohideen batcha · Page 1 of about 8 results (0.041 seconds)

AI Studio

AI Brief on every result

Start a 7-day free trial - 18-section briefs and case chat on any judgment in these results, plus Semantic Search on your next query.

Apr 24 1998

Palraj Vs. Lalchandh

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-24-1998

Subject : BankingCriminal

Acts : Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 138

Reported in : [2001]103CompCas527(Mad)

Advocate for Appellant : Mohideen Batcha, Adv. for;S. Packiaraj, Adv.

Rengasamy, J.1. This appeal is against the order of acquittal passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 4, Thiruchirapalli, C. C. No. 22 of 1993, for the offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Oct 25 1980

Jaithun Beevi and ors. Vs. Begum Dustagir

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Oct-25-1980

Subject : Tenancy

Reported in : (1981)1MLJ373

P. R. Gokulakrishnan, J.1. This revision petition is filed by the respondents in R. C. O. P. No. 96 of 1978 on the file of the Rent Controller (District Munsif, Madurai taluk) against the order passed...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jan 08 1935

Sri Raja Inuganti Venkata Rajagopala Rama Suryaprakasa Rao Vs. Sree Ch ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-08-1935

Subject : PropertyTenancy

Reported in : (1935)69MLJ133

Varadachariar, J.1. The plaintiff-appellant took a lease of a rice mill from the Polavaram Zamindar under Ex. A in 1926 and by Ex. B he assigned the lease to the defendants. It is not correct to...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Mar 11 1943

Zohara Khathum Bi Bi Vs. Mahaboob Bi by Her Son and Agent, P. Abdul Ha ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-11-1943

Subject : FamilyProperty

Reported in : AIR1943Mad677; (1943)2MLJ99

Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.1. The question here is whether a deed of gift of immovable property executed by one Ameena Bi on the 9th October, 1929, in favour of her niece, the third defendant in...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jan 17 1933

Panaganti Rama Rayanimgar (Dead) and anr. Vs. Umade Rajaha Raje Damara ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-17-1933

Subject : CivilLimitation

Reported in : AIR1934Mad1; (1934)66MLJ4

Madhavan Nair, J.1. The legal representative of the deceased 1st defendant is the appellant. This appeal arises out of a suit instituted by the plaintiff in the following circumstances.2. The plaintiff is the Raja of Kalahasti....

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 03 1954

P.V.S. Vencatachellum Vs. P.V.S. Kabalamurthy Pillai

Court : Chennai

Decided on : May-03-1954

Subject : FamilyProperty

Acts : Hindu Law; Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Sections 10 to 17; Mohomedan law; Indian Companies Act; Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent) Control Act, 1946 - Sections 7; Constitution of India - Article 19 and 19(1)

Reported in : AIR1955Mad350

Advocate for Appellant : K.S. Ramaratnam, Adv.

Ramaswami, J.1. Suit is for a declaration that the plaintiff has not been and is not a bare tenant as from month to month under the defendant of the buildings and premises described in the plaint...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 27 1996

Paramasivam and Another Vs. State by Inspector of Police

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-27-1996

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 34, 201, 302 and 304; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 164 and 313

Reported in : 1997CriLJ165

Advocate for Appellant : Mrs. G. Latha, Adv. for ;Venkatasubramaniam

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment in Sessions Case No. 78 of 1989 on the file of the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Tiruchirapalli, convicting the first appellant (A-1) for an offence under S....

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jan 08 1935

Sree Rajah Inuganti Venkata Rajagopala Rama Suryaprakasa Rao Vs. Sree ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-08-1935

Subject : Land Acquisition

Reported in : AIR1935Mad669; 157Ind.Cas.1005

1. The plaintiff-appellant took a lease of a rice mill from the Polavaram zamindar under Ex. A in 1926 and by Ex. B. he assigned the lease to the defendants. It is not correct to construe...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free

  • ‹ Prev
  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial