Chennai Court March 1909 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.
In Re: Davaluri Virayya
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-19-1909
Reported in: 1Ind.Cas.560
ORDERAbdur Rahim, J.1. As pointed out by the referring Magistrate, the order of the Sub-Magistrate was quite unjustified. The Sub-Magistrate refers to Section 480, Criminal Procedure Code, but he had power only to deal with the accused under that section if he committed one of the offences enumerated therein. It is rather surprising that because the accused walked with creaking shoes on his feet near the Court room of the Sub-Magistrate, the latter should have come to the conclusion that the accused intended to insult him or interrupt him in his work. The conviction in this case, as rightly suggested by the referring Magistrate, is an abuse of the power conferred by the Legislature on Courts to punish wilful acts of contempt or interference with the due discharge of judicial duties.2. The conviction and sentence are, therefore, set aside, and the fine, if paid, will be refunded....
Sreeman Maha Mandaleswara Katari Salva Maharaja Umade Rajah Maharaja R ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-19-1909
Reported in: 2Ind.Cas.18
1. This is an appeal against orders made by the District Judge of North Arcot on execution petitions presented by creditors of the late Raja of Karvetnager against his son, the present Raja.2. The decrees were obtained against the late Rajah and the petitioners sought to execute them against the present Rajah as the legal representative of his father.3. The decrees may be classified under 3, heads:1. Mortgage decrees.2. Decrees in execution of which properties have already been attached.3. Decrees which creditors are now seeking to execute for the first time.4. As regards classes 1 and 2, the Judge overruled the objections of the present Raja and allowed execution to proceed. As regards class 3 he dismissed the applications for attachment, but returned the applications with leave to represent them with an express statement that the property which the petitioners sought to take in execution was the separate property of the deceased Raja.5. The present Raja relies on an alleged custom th...
S.R.M.A.R. Ramasawmi Chettiar Vs. Oppilamani Chetti and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-17-1909
Reported in: 4Ind.Cas.1059
1. In our opinion the Subordinate Judge was right in holding that the estate of the deceased zemindar was Sufficiently and properly represented by his natural father Krishnaswamy Panikondar for the purpose of the execution proceedings under our consideration, At the death of the zemindar in 1900, Krishnaswamy Panikondar was in possession of the zemindari and claim. ed title thereto under a Will of the deceased. Some remote Sapindas of the zemindar claimed to be his heirs and denied the genuineness of the Will, but the District Registrar registered it after a severe contest (to quote the Subordinate Judge). The Sapindas then sold their claims to the appellant.2. Now the 1st respondent having obtained in the life-time of the zemindar an order for the sale of the property mortgaged to him had, in order to bring the property to sale, to apply for execution against the legal representative of the mortgagor. He knew that the true legal representative in the eye of the law was one of the riva...
Nanjappa Goundan Vs. Peruma Goundan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-16-1909
Reported in: 4Ind.Cas.18
1. The question argued in the second appeal is whether the defendant in the action is not entitled under Section 51 of the Transfer of Property Act to be paid by the plaintiff the value of the improvements which the former has effected on the land before he can be ejected. The defendant purchased the property from certain Hindu females having a limited power of disposition over it, and he alleged in answer to the claim of the reversioner who is the respondent in this appeal that the alienation was made for family necessity, that is, to pay off pre-existing debts. This necessity the defendant failed to prove and has, therefore, to give up the land. But he made certain improvements while he was in possession of the property and their value is estimated by the Munsif at Rs. 500. Both the lower Courts have, however, negatived the defendant's right to be paid for his improvements on the ground that he not only failed to prove the necessity which he set up but that in fact he made no inquiri...
Maunada Mudali and anr. Vs. Nallayya Goundan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-16-1909
Reported in: 4Ind.Cas.870
1. The question is whether the defendants-appellants, who belong to the Kaikolar (weaver) class are entitled to take their deity Kumarasawmi in procession with Sakkili melam (music) along the path (marked A in the plan, Ex. B.) which passes through the middle of the Vellala quarter. The plaintiffs are Vellalars and sue for a declaration that the defendants are not so entitled, the cause of action. being an order passed by the Magistrate under Section 144, Criminal Procedure Code, restraining them from interfering with the defendants Kaikolars carrying their idol in procession.2. The Munsif found that the path (A) was a public path and does not belong exclusively to the Vellalars, as contended for by them, and he dismissed the suit. On appeal the Judge found that a portion of the path, he does not find which portion, 'was formed by the plaintiff's first witness and otter persons slicing off from their sites for forming a way.' He also found that the street was the property of the Vellal...
In Re: Vyapuri Chetty and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-16-1909
Reported in: 4Ind.Cas.1142a
ORDERMunro, J.1. The facts found are that one Murugasami died, that his uncle, the 1st accused and cousins, the 2nd and 3rd accused, were in his house when he died, that some days afterwards these accused and others went to a land which had belonged to the deceased and cut the crop, that P.W. No. 2, father of Murugasami's widow hearing of this went with others to the land and remonstrated and attempted to reap the crop themselves, upon which the 1st accused pushed P.W. No. 3, and snatched a bill-book from him. On these facts the five prisoners were convicted of rioting.2. Accused Nos. 1 to 3 claimed that they were entitled to the land as they and the decease had been members of an undivided family. No division is proved, but the finding is that for some thirty years the accused has been in exclusive possession. Fifteen persons were complained against but only the petitioners, accused Nos. 1 to 3, 14 and 15, were found guilty of rioting. Before the five petitioners, could be found guilt...
In Re: the Indian Companies Act and in Re: the Petition of the Equitab ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-16-1909
Reported in: 2Ind.Cas.164
Wallis, J.1. This is a petition under Section 243 of the Indian Companies Act, praying for the winding up of the Madras Equitable Assurance Society, an unregistered Association formed for the mutual Assurance of lives in the year 1824, and now governed by the provisions of a special Act, Madras Act VI of 1869. Under Section 5 of this Act, there is a quinquennial valuation of the assets and liabilities of the Society, and such portion of the profits as the Directors may think, fit is applied in reduction of the premium payable during the next quinquennium by the holders of the policies in existence at the end of the quinquennium, in respect of which the valuation is made. Owing to the high rates of the premium charged by the Society, and other circumstances, the balance of profit as divisible at the end of each quinquennium has been very large-so large as to reduce the premiums payable under the policies by no less than 75 per cent., or to only one-fourth of the premium provided for in ...
The District Judge of Tinnevelly Vs. S. Palaniandy Mudaliar Ist Grade ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-15-1909
Reported in: 1Ind.Cas.667
1. We are not asked by Mr. P.R. Sundara Aiyar to deal with the pleader on the charge of supplying blank paper for the signature of the client, or of acting without instructions in the execution proceedings. Section 13(a) of the Legal Practitioners Act does not, as the District Judge seems to think, prohibit a pleader from acting without instructions, but only from acting on instructions from a person who is not the client or his client's agent or near relative.2. In the present case the conduct of the proceedings was left entirely to the pleader, the client being absent in the Tanjore District, and though we are of opinion that in such matters as purchasing for the client at the execution sales and the making of affidavits the pleader ought to have taken instructions, we cannot say that he may not have honestly believed himself justified in taking all the responsibility on himself in the circumstances.3. As regards the blank forms of execution petitions, none of which were actually use...
In Re T.S. Subramanya Aiyar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-15-1909
Reported in: 1Ind.Cas.867
ORDER1. We do not think that it was open to the Magistrate to convict the accused of cheating under Section 420, Indian Penal Code, as he was not charged with that offence, and the defence evidence that would be appropriate in regard to such a charge would be different from that required on a charge of criminal breach of trust under Section 406. We set aside the conviction under Section 420. But we think that there is evidence to support the conviction under Section 406. No doubt the reference to interest or the security deposit suggests that the money was intended to be available for use by the accused as capital, but it is by no means conclusive to that effect. Many other circumstances support the finding of the Magistrate on a breach of trust. We decline to interfere with the conviction or with the sentence, which is a lenient one....
Pedda Vencata Reddy and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-14-1909
Reported in: 1Ind.Cas.682
ORDER1. The chief point pressed upon us on behalf of the accused is that the trial is rendered invalid by the fact that the charge alleges the commission of theft and of criminal intimidation and unlawful assembly on the 12th August and also alleges criminal intimidation and unlawful assembly on 13th August. It is argued that the acts alleged as constituting these offences did not form part of the same transaction within the meaning of Section 235 of the Criminal Procedure Code and that the Magistrate should, therefore, have tried the several offences separately. There is nothing to show that the accused took the objection before the Magistrate. So he has not discussed it, but they did take it before the Sessions Judge on appeal, and he has found that there was no illegality in the frame of the charge. We think that the Sessions Judge is right. The theft of the sheep was not committed secretly by the accused, but openly, at sunset, while people were still about, and when the owner remo...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »