Chennai Court July 1883 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.
Gade Chellapilla Rau Pantulu Vs. Gade Balaramakrishnama Pantulu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-13-1883
Reported in: (1883)ILR6Mad424
Kindersley, J.1. Plaintiff and defendant are undivided brothers. Another brother's widow had obtained a decree for maintenance against both. She attached the house in which plaintiff was residing, and plaintiff thereupon paid the whole sum due to her, and now sues defendant for contribution. The District Munsif has given plaintiff a decree subject to our opinion on the question: 'Whether a contribution suit, under the circumstances alleged, can lie in a Small Cause Court? '2. As to the general question the decision in Govinda Muneya Tiruyan v. Bapu 5 M.H.C.R. 200 is conclusive. If another High Court has taken a different view, that would not justify the reference, because the District Munsif is bound to follow the law laid down by this Court.3. It is settled, therefore, that a suit for contribution may be brought before a Small Cause Court. But in the particular circumstances of this case, we think, that the suit could not be sustained, and ought to have been dismissed. The relations o...
Arunachala Chetti Vs. Munisami Mudali and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-12-1883
Reported in: (1883)ILR7Mad39
Muttusami Ayyar and Hutchins, JJ.1. We think that the Lower Courts were right in throwing the burden of proof on the plaintiff. It has been found that the mortgage was not executed to secure the payment of an antecedent debt. If the plaintiff had joined the sons in his suit against the father, he would have had to establish the liability of their shares, and his position cannot be improved by obtaining a decree against the father alone. The sons subsequently brought a suit for partition, pending which the property was attached and their shares released.2. We dismiss the second appeal with costs....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›