Skip to content

Chennai Court August 1882 Judgments

Browse smarter

Open an 18-section brief on any judgment

Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.

  • AI Brief & Ask
  • Semantic AI Search
  • Devil's Bench

Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.

Aug 03 1882

indukuri Rama Raju Vs. Yerramilli Subbarayudu

Court: Chennai

Decided on: Aug-03-1882

Reported in: (1882)ILR5Mad387

Innes, Officiating C.J. and Tarrant, J.1. The contention is that, as there was other land of the original mortgagor which the second defendant, the second mortgagee, might have attached and sold for realization of the mortgage amount, he ought in equity to be required to realize from that land instead of the portion of the mortgaged land which plaintiff purchased.2. The purchase of plaintiff was subject to existing encumbrances, and there is no foundation for his contention that the mortgagee should be thus deprived of what are his legal rights.3. We must dismiss the second appeal....


Aug 02 1882

Sri Sri Chandramala Patta Mahadevi Vs. Sri Muktamala Patta Mahadevi an ...

Court: Chennai

Decided on: Aug-02-1882

Reported in: (1883)ILR6Mad20

Kindersley, J.1. The plaintiff, as the widow of the late Sri Ramachandra, zamindar of Hatgada, claimed to be trustee of a certain temple in the fort of Hatgada, and, as such trustee, she sued to recover possession of the village of Jannapuram, with the revenues of which that temple had been endowed; for the sum of Rs. 540, being arrears of revenue for Fasli 1288, and for subsequent revenue at the same rate; also for an injunction restraining the first defendant from interfering.2. The first defendant claimed to be the trustee of the temple in question as the widow of her late husband Sri Chaitania Chandra, who, she alleged, had been adopted by the plaintiff as directed by her husband, the late zamindar. She also alleged that she was the mother and guardian of the minor son of the said Chaitania Chandra. In a second written statement the first defendant alleged that the late zamindar, plaintiff's husband, has made his will on the 2nd December 1859, whereby he had appointed the first def...


  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial