Chennai Court April 1917 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.
Pandiyan Pillai Vs. K.V. Vellayappa Rowther and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-04-1917
Reported in: AIR1918Mad572; 42Ind.Cas.438; (1917)33MLJ316
1. This is a suit for a declaration that the property in suit is liable to be attached in execution of a decree obtained by the plaintiff against the 2nd defendant. He mortgaged the property in 1894 to the 1st defendant. In 1901, the 2nd defendant transferred the patta to the 1st defendant. In October 1912, the plaintiff attached the property in execution of his decree. The 1st defendant preferred a claim which was allowed. Thereupon this suit was instituted. The District Judge differing from the Subordinate Judge held that the property is liable to be sold in execution subject to the 1st defendant's mortgage.2. In the second appeal Mr. Devadoss's first contention was that the mortgage was an anomalous one, that the condition for converting it into an absolute sale after four years worked itself out, and that the 1st defendant became the absolute owner. We are unable to agree. The period of four years is fixed not as a term of the mortgage, but only as limiting the period of enjoyment ...
In Re: S. Swaminatha Iyer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-04-1917
Reported in: AIR1918Mad583; 39Ind.Cas.995
ORDER1. The prosecuion in this ease was under Section 15(a) of the Indian Petroleum Act, VIII of 1899, which says, whoever, in contravention of this Act or any of the rules thereunder, imports, possesses, or transports any petroleum' shall be liable to certain penalties. Section 11 of the Act says, 'no quantity of petroleum exceeding five hundred gallons shall be kept by any one person or on the same premises or shall be transported, except under, and in accordance with the conditions of, a license granted under this Act.'2. The accused is the agent of the Asiatic Petroleum Company at Bellary and he received a consignment of 800 tins, each tin consisting of 4 gallons, from his principal company. The consignment arrived on the 12th December 1915 and the accused's clerk presented the railway receipt on the 14th and an entry to that effect was duly made according to the usual mode of business in the books of the Railway Company. Then he began sending the tins to different customers, to mo...
Subbaratna Mudali and ors. Vs. Balakrishnaswami Naidu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-03-1917
Reported in: 41Ind.Cas.408; (1917)33MLJ207
1. This appeal raises an interesting question as to the succession to the property of a woman of the dancing girl caste. The deceased woman Palani inherited the property in dispute from her mother Nagu, who inherited it from her mother Mottai who again inherited it from her father Arunachallam. Arunachallam had two brothers Ramaswami and Mathurbutham and the question is whether Mathurbutham's daughter Seethai or Ramaswami's daughter's son Marudamuthu Mudali is the heir of Palani. All the women appear to have followed the profession of a' prostitute. That members of this caste are Hindus is certain, though the ancient writers and their modern exponents find some difficulty in fixing them in one of the four castes; but whether they belong to the Suira or fourth caste or to a separate fifth caste is immaterial. That male members of this caste are usually governed by the Hindu Law and usage does not seem to have been questioned; so also when female members marry and have children, as they ...
Battina Appanna and ors. Vs. Sreemanthu Raja Yarlagadda Venkataramalin ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-03-1917
Reported in: 42Ind.Cas.464; (1917)33MLJ355
1. The land in respect of which the rent is claimed was originally dry-land. For some time, until Fasli 1318 the defendant took water from one of the Kistna Canals and paid the Government Rs. 5 as water tax and Rs. 180 to the Zamindar as rent. In Fasli 1318, the Government agreed to localise the lands to which Government was bound to supply water free of assessment.2. After this arrangement the water allowed by the Government became the Zamindar's. The defendant as usual has taken his usual quantity from that water and the Zamindar has asked that the water rate of Rs. 5 paid to the Government should be paid to him. Both the Lower Courts decreed the plaintiff's claim and the tenant has appealed.3. Mr. T.M. Krishnaswami Aiyar in his able argument contended before us that unless the Government assigned their right to collect the water-tax, the Zamindar is not entitled to it. But seeing that the Government have retired from the field and left the Zamindar free to make his own arrangements ...
Paramasivam Pillai Vs. Subbaya Nadar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-03-1917
Reported in: AIR1918Mad411(1); 43Ind.Cas.551
1. We agree with the learned Judge who heard the civil revision petition in thinking that the respondent was equitably entitled to protection on the facts of this case, as the question between the parties whether there was good consideration for the promissory note could not be finally decided so long as the respondents-vendors' title to the land which formed the consideration was in jeopardy in another suit.2. In Milligan v. Cooke (1808) 33 E.R. 884 the Court of Chancery in England ordered an indemnity to be given in a suit for specific performance of an agreement of a contract of sale of property the title to which might have become defective owing to a future contingency, and no illegality has been shown to us to a Court in India adopting a similar course when the equities arising between the parties demand it.3. We decline to interfere and we dismiss this Letters Patent Appeal with costs....
Enuga Sundararama Reddi Vs. Bezwada Pattabhiramireddi (Dead) Add ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-03-1917
Reported in: 42Ind.Cas.421
Sadasiva Aiyar, J.1. This is an appeal by the 3rd defendant in the suit against the order of the District Court refusing his application to set aside the decree passed against him. That application to set aside treated the decree as an ex parte decree so far as he was concerned. Turning to the decree itself, I find the wording is as follows:--'This suit coming on for hearing in the presence of Messrs. T. V. Venkatarama Aiyar and R. Subbarayudu, Vakils for the plaintiffs, and Mr. M. Chengayya, Vakil for defendants, this Court doth order and decree that plaintiffs do recover from the family properties of all the defendants Rs. 4,204-6-2 and from 1st defendant personally and from the family properties of all the defendants Rs. 1,459-0-6, etc.' Thus on the face of it, the decree was passed against all the four defendants, including the appellant (3rd defendant), in the presence of and after hearing their Vakil and it is, therefore, on its face not an ex parte decree against him. The suit w...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›