Chennai Court February 1918 Judgments
Sukkulal Sowcar Vs. A.V. Tirumala Row Sahib
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-27-1918
Reported in: 51Ind.Cas.295
Coutts Trotter, J.1. This is a suit on a promissory note and an equitable mortgage of properties securing it. The plaintiff is a Sowcar and the defendant is the Jagirdar of Arni represented by the manager of his estate as his guardian. It is an estate under the Court of Wards and his interests are represented by Mr. V. Ramesam, the Goverment Header. The contract is this. It is a promissory-note, dated the 18th day of July 1915, in the ordinary form for Rs. 10,000,--'on demand I promise to pay Sukkulal Sowcar or order at Madras, the sum of rupees ten thousand only with interest at 24 per cent, per annum for value received in cash.' That is the promissory note and that is accompanied by two other contemporaneous documents one of which is not of very great importance, because it only shows what was done, which I am going to describe presently. The other is a letter signed by the defendant in which he says this:--'I have this day borrowed and received from you the sum of Rs. 10,000 upon th...
Tag this Judgment!Kodi Sankara Bhatta Vs. MoidIn and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-26-1918
Reported in: (1918)35MLJ120
Sadasiva Aiyar, J.1. The plaintiff is the appellant. Plaintiff owns a warg land marked 17/27 in the plan Ex. C as the reversionary heir of the husband of one Devamma. Devamma granted a usufructuary mortgage Ex. A in 1890, not only of the warg lands 17/27, but also of plaint item (1) which was the slope of a hill adjoining the warg land. Item (1) is marked A, A 1 and B in the plan. It is well known that in South Kanara, warg lands have what are called kumaki rights over 41 certain extent of adjoining waste land. Hence Devamma usufructuarily mortgaged in 1890 both her warg lands and the plaint item (1) in dispute and put her mortgagee in possession and the said mortgagee and his successors in title including the 1st defendant have been in possession of item (1) along with the warg land all along from 1890.2. In the settlement of 1902, pattah was issued for the warg lands alone, item (1) being classed as waste poramboke.3. The plaintiff who owned the equity of redemption in the lands usuf...
Tag this Judgment!Maistry Rajabhai NaraIn of Cutch Vs. Haji Karim Mamood of Bombay Throu ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-26-1918
Reported in: (1918)35MLJ189
Krishnan, J.1. The question raised before us in Second Appeal is one of jurisdiction. The facts necessary to be stated for the decision are these. The plaintiff chartered a vessel named ' Ganga Patharath' belonging to the 1st defendant to sail from Cutch to Basra and there to take on board 700 bundles of dates and to discharge the same at Calicut. This charter-party was entered into at Cutch the 1st defendant being a resident of that place and a subject of the State of Cutch. 2nd defendant is the tindal or the master of the ship. The ship sailed to Basra and took on board 651 bundles of date but on her voyage to Calicut she met with rough weather in the Arabian sea and to save her and the cargo the master had to jettison 165 bundles of dates. On her subsequent arrival in Calicut the master refused delivery of any of the plaintiff's goods till the freight for the whole consignment was paid and the plaintiff thereupon paid it under protest and took delivery of the remaining bundles. He h...
Tag this Judgment!Mappillai Kadir Rowther Vs. Emperor
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-26-1918
Reported in: 46Ind.Cas.47
ORDER1. The petitioner stood bail for a person charged with an offence under Section 395, Indian Penal Code, in the sum of Rs. 6.000. The bond is in form No; 42, which is in accordance with Section 499, Criminal Procedure Code. The bond was taken when the case was committed to the Sessions, and the part of the bond signed by the accused states that he undertook to appear on the 1st November 1917 at the Court of Session at Madura to answer a charge against him. The part which is signed by the petitioner is in these words: 'We jointly and severally hereby declare ourselves and each of us sureties for the said Alagappa Tevan that he shall attend Court every day of the preliminary enquiry, and as the case has been sent for trial to the Sessions Court, Madura, that he shall appear before the said Sessions Court, to answer the charge against him (the words in the printed book 'should the case be sent' being a mistranslation) and in case of his making default therein, we bind ourselves to for...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Annasami Nadavan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-26-1918
Reported in: 45Ind.Cas.527
1. The first contention of Mr. Thornton is that, though in this case the sentences of the petitioners are such that no appeal would lie in their behalf, by reason of the fact that they were tried with some other persons who received appealable sentences and preferred an appeal therefrom to the Sessions Judge, he was bound to examine the case of the petitioners also, as if an appeal lay in their case as well. We do not think that there is any support in the Criminal Procedure Code for such a contention. Section 408 says that when a person has been convicted by a First Class Magistrate, he may appeal to the Court of Session, but Section 413 lays down that there shall be no appeal by such a person if the sentence passed is imprisonment not exceeding one month or a fine not exceeding Rs. 50. Mr. Thornton's argument is based upon proviso (6) to Section 408 which says 'when in any case an Assistant Sessions Judge or a Magistrate specially empowered under Section 30 passes any sentence of imp...
Tag this Judgment!Maistry Rajabhai NaraIn of Cutch Vs. Haji Karim Mahomed of Bombay Thro ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-26-1918
Reported in: 47Ind.Cas.708
Krishnan, J.1. The question raised before us in second appeal is one of jurisdiction. The facts necessary to be stated for the decision are these. The plaintiff chartered a vessel named 'Ganga Patharatb ' belonging to the 1st defendant to sail from Cutch to Basra and there to take on board 700 bundles of dates and to discharge the same at Calicut. The charter-party was entered into at Cutch, the 1st defendant being a resident of that place and a subject of the State of Cutch. Second defendant is the tindal or the master of the ship. The ship sailed to Basra and took on board 651 bundles of date, but on her voyage to Calicut she met with rough weather in the Arabian Sea and to save her and the cargo the master had to jettison 165 bundles of dates. On her subsequent arrival in Calicut the master refused delivery of any of the plaintiff's 'goods till the freight for the whole consignment was paid and the plaintiff thereupon paid it under protest and took delivery of the remaining bundles....
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Ayyar and anr., Vs. Emperor
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-25-1918
Reported in: 49Ind.Cas.337
1. Twenty three persons were convicted by the Sessions Judge of Coimbatore of the offences of rioting, grievous hurt and other allied offences. Of these, some have appealed to us and we will have to deal with the case of each of them separately. Information' was given on the 19th 'of, May last year at the Annur Police Station of a theft committed in the house of a Valayan. It appears that the Police searched 'the houses of some persons within the limits of the Police station and then on the 20th in the morning the Sub Inspector, prosecution 1st witness, along with some constables and others came to a village called Molakalipalayam. which is within the Jurisdiction of the Sulur Police Station. Molakalipalayam is about two or three miles from Annur. There the houses of some of the Goundans were searched and in the house of accused No. 20, who, it may be mentioned, has not preferred any appeal, a cloth was found which was identified as part of the stolen property. The man was arrested and...
Tag this Judgment!The Madras and Southern Mahratta Railway Company Ltd. Vs. Haridoss Ban ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-22-1918
Reported in: (1918)35MLJ35
John Wallis, C.J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment of Mr. Justice Kumaraswami Sastri in a suit brought by the plaintiff who was the indorsee for value of two railway receipts, to make the Railway Company liable for misdelivery. The facts were, that the goods in question were consigned by one Gurunatham to his own order to the Madras Harbour station of the defendant railway. Gurunatham had pledged the railway receipts to the Bank of Madras, and the Bank of Madras were the persons entitled to delivery of the goods. It was intended that one Swaminatha Reddi should pay the Bank and get the railway receipts assigned to him and then take delivery of the goods. He managed, however, to get possession of the goods from the Railway Company, without production of the railway receipts and before he had paid the Bank. This was apparently because, for many years, large consignments of cotton had been consigned by Gurunatham in this way and had been duly taken delivery of by Swaminatha Reddi. Tw...
Tag this Judgment!The Madras and Southern Mahratta Railway Company Limited Vs. Haridoss ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-22-1918
Reported in: (1918)ILR41Mad871
John Wallis, Kt., C.J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment of Mr. Justice Kumaraswami Sastri in a suit brought by the plaintiff who was the indorsee for value of two railway receipts to make the Railway Company liable for misdelivery. The facts were that the goods in question were consigned by one Gurunatham, to his own order, to the Madras Harbour station of the defendant railway. Gurunatham had pledged the railway receipts with the Bank of Madras, and the Bank of Madras were the persons entitled to delivery of the goods. It was intended that one Swaminatha Reddy should pay the Bank and get the railway receipts assigned to him and then take delivery of the goods. He managed however to get possession of the goods from the Railway Company without production of the railway receipts and before he had paid the Bank. This was apparently because for many years large consignments of cotton had been consigned by Gurunatham in this way and had been duly taken delivery of by Swaminatha Reddy. ...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Iyer Represented by His Authorised Agent V. Krishna Iyer Vs. S ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-22-1918
Reported in: 47Ind.Cas.723
1. The facts of the case areas follows:--One Kuppuswami Aiyar was the last male owner of the properties in suit and of other properties. He made a Will under which his mother, his widow and his natural brother were the legatees. Original Suit No. 27 of 1901 was brought by the widow Minachi against her mother-in-law Seshiammal and against her husband's natural brother Srinivasa Iyer disputing the genuineness of the Will. The suit ended in a compromise Exhibit D. Thus the widow's claims were settled. Thereupon two persons claiming themselves to be the nearest reversioners of Kuppuswami Aiyar sued in Original Suit No. 32 of 1902 the widow, the mother and the natural brother for a declaration that the Will was not genuine. This suit also ended in a compromise, Exhibit F. The present suit is by one of the two plaintiffs in Original Suit No. 32 of 1902 for a declaration that he is solely entitled to the property secured under the compromise. It may be mentioned that the the other plaintiff i...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »