Chennai Court April 1890 Judgments
The Court of Wards and Sri Sri Veera Pratapa Rudra, Gajapati Narayana ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-30-1890
Reported in: (1896)6MLJ31
Muthusawmy Aiyer, J.1. It is provided by Section 7 of Act IV of 1882 that every person competent to contract and entitled to transferable property is competent to transfer such property to the extent and in the manner allowed and prescribed by any law for the time being in force. It is further provided by Section 11 of the Indian Contract Act that every person is competent to contract who is of the age of majority according to the law to which he is subject. Section 12 declares that a person is of sound mind for the purpose of making a contract, if, at the time when he makes it, he is capable of understanding it, and of forming a rational judgment as to its effect upon his interests. With reference to these provisions of law the circumstances under which document A was executed raise for consideration two specific questions in connection with its validity; viz., (1).--Whether the present Zemindar was of sound mind at the [32] date of A within the meaning of Section 12 ; and (2).--Wheth...
Tag this Judgment!In Re:
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-23-1890
Reported in: (1891)ILR14Mad255
1. We are of opinion that the unstamped instrument executed in Australia and dated 26th May 1862 is not chargeable either under Act XXXVI of 1860 or Act X of 1862 with stamp duty. Consequently no penalty can be levied under Act I of 1879....
Tag this Judgment!Venkataramanna and ors. Vs. Venkayya
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-14-1890
Reported in: (1891)ILR14Mad377
1. It appears that the suit was brought upon a bond executed by defendant to plaintiff's father, who is now dead, and there is nothing to show that on the face of the bond the debt is described as being a debt due to the joint family consisting of the father and the son. It may be that the money was advanced from the father's private funds. A son is prima facie taken to succeed to a debt due to his father by right of inheritance, unless his succession by survivorship is indicated on the face of the bond creating the debt. Though Act VII of 1889 applies only to cases of succession, it states in the preamble that it is intended to afford protection to parties paying debts to the representatives of deceased persons. It would naturally impair the protection intended to be afforded by the statute to throw in every case on the debtor the obligation of making an inquiry at the time of payment, whether the person claiming to recover the debt claims by right of survivorship or of inheritance. O...
Tag this Judgment!Queen-empress Vs. Chinna Tevan and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-1890
Reported in: (1891)ILR14Mad36
1. This is another case of a conviction by a jury of persons accused of dacoity against the opinion and advice of the Sessions Judge although he declines to refer the case to the High Court under Section 307 of the Code of Criminal Procedure; we have no power to interfere, however absurd or wrong we may think the verdict to have been. There has been no misdirection by the Sessions Judge, and there is evidence against the prisoners, if the jurymen chose to believe it. The sentence also is not too severe supposing the prisoners are guilty. The prisoners, of course, may bring their case to the notice of His Excellency the Governor in Council, if they be so advised.2. Our duty under the present state of the law is to dismiss the petition and confirm the conviction and sentence....
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›