Chennai Court November 1900 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.
Jagannadha Rao and ors. Vs. Kamaraju
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-08-1900
Reported in: (1901)ILR24Mad284
Benson, J.1. In this case the accused have been acquitted of the offence of taking a girl under the age of 14 years out of the keeping of her lawful guardian without his consent with intent that she should be compelled, or knowing it to be likely that she would be compelled, to marry against her will (Sections 361, 363, 366, Indian Penal Code).2. Government appeals against the acquittal.3. I think the facts have been correctly found by the Sessions Judge, and may be briefly stated as follows:The girl, Sarasama, aged 8 years, is the daughter of P. Acharlu, a Tahsildar. Her sister, Ramamma, is married to a nephew of Kamaraja, Sarasamma had been on a visit with her sister, Ramamma, in the house of Kamaraju for about a month, with her father's knowledge and consent. The accused are four brothers, and they are the nephews of P. Acharlu. About midnight on the 10th June they came to the house of Kamaraju, which is close to their own, and took the girl, Sarasamma, to their own house, where she...
Sabhapathi Gurukkal Vs. Lakshmu Ammal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-08-1900
Reported in: (1901)ILR24Mad293
1. In the case or Vythelinga Mudelly v. Cundaswamy Mudely 8 M.H.C.R. 21 cited for the appellants, the order by which leave to sue was refused remained in force when a subsequent application was presented praying for the grant of leave to institute a suit substantially the same as that for the institution of which leave had been refused. The order granting leave passed on such an application by a Judge other than the Judge who had refused the leave was held to be irregular, as it amounted to a review by the former Judge of the decision of the latter under circumstances which did not permit of the review. The present case is clearly distinguishable. For, in pursuance of Mr. Justice Boddam's order granting leave, a suit was brought, though it was subsequently withdrawn with permission to sue again in respect of the same matter. The force of the order granting leave was exhausted by the institution of the suit in pursuance of the order. Consequently when the appellants applied for leave to...
Rami Reddi and ors. Vs. Rangamma
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-07-1900
Reported in: (1901)11MLJ20
1. Venkata Reddi died in 1877 leaving at his death no male coparceners but leaving his wife Mangamma and his daughter, the plaintiff, him surviving. Pemmi Reddi, the natural son of Nallappa, but the adopted son of another Venkata Reddi seems to have been nearest sapinda. Venkata Reddi also had a sister who married the 2nd defendant, and they had a daughter (wife of the 4th defendant) who is the mother of the principal defendant. It is against this defendant, alleged to have been adopted by Mangamma, that the plaintiff makes her claim, Mangamma having died in 1896. The adoption is founded on an authority alleged to have been given to Mangamma by her husband just before his death which occurred suddenly and also on the assent admittedly given by the abovementioned Pemmi Reddi. The District Judge has found that the giving and acceptance of the child which constitute an adoption are not proved to have taken place and that no authority was in fact given by Mangamma's husband. As to the latt...
Venkatasami Reddi Vs. Rangamma
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-07-1900
Reported in: (1901)11MLJ27
Shephard, J.1. In this appeal the question is whether the defendant has acquired a good title to the inam lands over which Mangamma admittedly had free power of disposition. The instrument by which the conveyance to the defendant is said to have been made is the adoption deed of the 10th March 1894. There can be no doubt as to the individual whom Mangamma intended to benefit, and it is clear also that she must have known the untruth of the recitals made in the deed touching the authority given by her husband, and it is on that authority rather than on the sapinda's consent that her power to adopt is founded. The document says, 'The permission accorded by my husband is the essential thing, and in proof thereof the assent of the sapinda was obtained.' Then it states the fact of the adoption and its religious consequences. And finally there come the words of gift assuming what is by no means clear that she believed her adoption to be unimpeachable in point of law. I do not think there is ...
Panga and ors. Vs. Unnikutti and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-06-1900
Reported in: (1901)ILR24Mad275
1. We agree with the District Judge that the suit is barred both as res judicata and by Section 42, Specific Relief Act. In the unreported decision of the Court in Krishnan Nambiar v. Chathu Nambiar Appeal No. 135 of 1885 (unreported) it was held that 'the value of a suit to have it declared that certain persons are or are not members of a tarwad is the value of the share of the tarwad property which would be allotted to them if a partition were made by common consent.'2. In this view the value of the plaintiffs' suit would be 39/38ths, i.e., two-thirds of Rs. 3,000 which is the value of the whole property. In other words the value of the suit for purposes of jurisdiction is only Rs. 2,000, and the suit was therefore triable by a District Munsif Consequently the decision in Original Suit No. 428 of 1894, Shernad District Munsif's Court, that there was a community of interest, is conclusive between the parties in the present suit.3. As regards Section 42, Specific Relief Act, we think t...
Secretary of State for India Vs. Venkatachala Perumal Pillai and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-05-1900
Reported in: (1901)11MLJ117
1. We do not think that any valid objection can be taken to the notice given on the ground that it proceeds from only two out of the three joint owners. It has been repeatedly held that the object of the notice required by Section 424, Civil Procedure Code, is to give the defendant an opportunity pf settling the claim, if so advised, without litigation. The object is fully attained by two out of the three plaintiffs giving the notice, and the same consideration shows that the second objection to the notice, viz., that no notice was given of the claim in respect of the amount collected as Fasli jasti for fasli 1803 is invalid. The notice given was that the defendant had no right to collect anything on account of Fasli jasti, and that the collection which had been made, on that account, for fasli 1302, was illegal. The fact that a further sum for a subsequent fasli was collected, after the notice of the suit had been given, should not, we think, be held to be 'a fresh cause of action req...
Vemmuri Rattigadu Vs. Konda Reddi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-05-1900
Reported in: (1901)11MLJ23
Benson, J.1. One Rattigadu, a Mala or Hindu Pariah by birth, but now a convert to Christianity and a weaver by profession according to the District Magistrate, but who in fact earns his living by cooly work according to the Village Magistrate, was convicted by the latter of having used abusive language and was sentenced to two hours confinement in the stocks under Section 10 of Regulation XI of 1816 of the Madras Code.2. The District Magistrate relying on the case of Nabbi Sahib I.L.R. 6 M. 247 refers the sentence as illegal on the ground that a native Christian is not a person belonging to one 'of the lower castes of the people' so as to be within the purview of the Regulation. In the case of Nabbi Sahib the High Court held 'a Mahomedan cannot be said to belong to the lower castes of the people,' and the District Magistrate points out that conversions to Islam from the low caste Cherumars of Malabar are of daily occurrence and that if by reason of their creed they are exempt from conf...
Rattigadu Vs. Konda Reddi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-05-1900
Reported in: (1901)ILR24Mad271
Benson, J.1. One Rattigadu, a Mala or Hindu pariah by birth, but now a convert to Christianity, and a weaver by profession according to the District Magistrate, but who, in fact, earns his living by cooly work according to the 'Village Magistrate, was convicted by the latter of having used abusive language, and was sentenced to two hours' confinement in the stocks under Section 10 of Regulation XI of 1816 of the Madras Code.2. The District Magistrate, relying on The Queen v. Nabi I.L.R. 6 Mad. 247, refers to the sentence, as illegal, on the ground that a Native Christian is not a person belonging to one '' of the lower castes of the people' so as to be within the purview of the regulation. In the case of The Queen v. Nabi I.L.R. 6 Mad. 247 the High Court held that 'a Muhammadan cannot be said to belong to the lower castes of the people,' and the District Magistrate points out that conversions to Islam from the low caste Cherumars of Malabar are of daily occurrence, and that if they by ...
The Secretary of State for India in Council Vs. Perumal Pillai and ors ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-05-1900
Reported in: (1901)ILR24Mad279
1. We do not think that any valid objection can be taken to the notice given, on the ground that it proceeded from only two out of the three joint owners. It has been repeatedly held that the object of the notice required by Section 424, Civil Procedure Code, is to give the defendant an opportunity of settling the claim, if so advised, without litigation. That object is fully attained by two out of the three plaintiffs giving the notice, and the same consideration shows that the second objection to the notice, viz., that no notice was given of the claim in respect of the amount collected as fasli-jasti for fasli 1303 is invalid. The notice given was that the defendant had no right to collect anything on account of fasli-jasti, and that the collection which had been made, on that account, for fasli 1302 was illegal, The fact that a further sum for a subsequent fasli was collected after notice of the suit had been given should not, we think, be held to be a fresh cause of action requirin...
Padma Vathemma Vs. Rajah of Venkatagiri
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-02-1900
Reported in: (1901)11MLJ115
1. Upon the finding that these cesses have been paid as part of the rent, they do not fall within Clause 13 of the second schedule of the Provincial Small Cause Court Act. They are therefore rent just as the jodi is, and according to the recent Full Bench ruling in S.A. No. 476 of 1899, all suits for rent are of a nature cognizable by a Court of Small Causes. The amount here being under Rs. 500, no second appeal lies. The fact that the plaintiff asserted that he was entitled to recover the jodi etc., on the liability of the land does not alter the nature of the suit in a case like this See Mullapudi Balakrishanayya v. Venkatanarasimha Appa Row I.L.R. 19 M. 329.2. The second appeal therefore fails and is dismissed, but without costs....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »