Chennai Court November 1915 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.
Ranga Aiyangar and ors. Vs. Narayan Chariar Alias Chakravarthi Vijiyar ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-01-1915
Reported in: AIR1916Mad887(3); (1916)30MLJ13
Sadasiva Aiyar, J.1. The plaintiffs are the appellants. The first plaintiffs father, Srinivasa Aiyangar, mortgaged the plaint properties with possession to the defendant's ancestor, Srinivasachariar in 1864. The Othi deed contained also a covenant by the mortgagor to pay the mortgage money personally. The defendant's ancestor brought a suit against Srinivasa Aiyangar's sons in 1867 for recovery of the Othi amount of Rs. 136 on the charge of the mortgaged property (the plaint itself was not filed in the records but the suit might be taken as having, contained the usual prayers for sale on default and for recovery of the balance, if any, from the defendants therein to the extent of their (sic) properties). In April 1872, the decree, Exhibit A, was passed of which the operative portion is as follows:'The plaintiffs obtain from the defendants the suit amount and all the costs of the suit, that the Othi property be sold in order to satisfy the decree, in case the decree amount be not paid w...
Ranga Ayyangar and Six ors. Vs. Narayana Chariar Alias Chakravarthi Vi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-01-1915
Reported in: (1916)ILR39Mad896
Sadasiva Ayyar, J.1. The plaintiffs are the appellants. The first plaintiff's father, Sreenivasa Aiyangar, mortgaged the plaint properties with possession to the defendant's ancestor, Srinivasa Chariar in 1864. The Othi deed contained also a covenant by the mortgagor to pay the mortgage money personally. The defendant's ancestor brought a suit against Sreenivasa Aiyangar's sons in 1867, for recovery of the Othi amount of Rs. 136, on the charge of the mortgaged property. (The plaint itself was not filed in the records but the suit might be taken as having contained the usual prayers for sale on default and for recovery of the balance if any from the defendants therein to the extent of their ancestral properties.) In April 1872 the decree (Exhibit A) was passed, of which the operative portion is as follows:The plaintiff obtain from the defendants the suit amount and all the costs of the suit, that the Othi property be sold in order to satisfy the decree in case the decree amount be not p...
Vudathu Kamalanabhan and anr. Vs. Vudathu Sattirazu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-01-1915
Reported in: 32Ind.Cas.99
1. This case has unfortunately been decided on a preliminary point and not tried on its merits. The result is that it has to go back to be tried over again. We know that the particular Judge in this case has a heavy district and is a conscientious officer and we do not suggest it has been done for the purpose of saving trouble.2. The point taken here was that this suit was barred by limitation. The suit was brought by the plaintiffs, who were the next presumptive reversioners to the estate of one Virraju, deceased. He left a widow and the widow produced in due course of time a Will, dated 20th June 1907, purporting to convey absolutely the whole of Virraju's properties to his widow. He died in August 1907, and in October 1907 the widow applied under the Succession Certificate Act for a certificate to enable her to collect the debts owing to her deceased husband and in accordance with the machinery set up by the Act, she put in a petition stating her rights to collect those debts and ob...
Ranga Aiyangar and ors. Vs. Narayana Chariar Alias Chakravarti Vijayar ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-01-1915
Reported in: 32Ind.Cas.30
Sadasiva Aiyar, J.1. The plaintiffs are the appellants. The first plaintiff's father, Sreenivasa Aiyangar, mortgaged the plaint properties with possession to the defendants' ancestor, Sreenivasa Chariar in 1864. The othi deed contained also a covenant by the mortgagor to pay the mortgage-money personally. The defendants' ancestor brought a suit against Sreenivasa Aiyangar's sons in 1867 for recovery of the othi amount of Rs. 136 on the charge of the mortgaged property. (The plaint itself was not filed in the records but the suit might be taken as having contained the usual prayers for sale on default and for recovery of the balance, if any, from the defendants therein to the extent of their ancestral properties.) In April 1872, the decree, Exhibit A, was passed, of which the operative portion is as follows: The plaintiffs obtain from the defendants the suit amount and all the costs of the suit, that the othi property be sold in order to satisfy the decree in case the decree amount be n...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›