Chennai Court September 1919 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.
P.L.P.L. Palaniappa Chetty Vs. V.S.S.P. Subramanian Chetty and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-16-1919
Reported in: 54Ind.Cas.740
1. This is an appeal against the order of the District Judge of Ramnad dismissing an application presented by the appellant before us under Section 93 of the Provincial Insolvency Act.2. A preliminary objection was taken by Mr. Krishnaswami Aiyar that the appellant is not a person aggrieved' within the meaning of Section 46 of the Provincial Insolvency Act, and, therefore, that this appeal does not lie. He cited lyappa Nainar v. Manica Asari 27 Ind. Cas. 241 : 40 M.P 630 which is a decision directly in point. Some of the reasons given by the learned Judges in tint case do not commend themselves to us, but we think that the conclusion of the learned Judges is right. Section 43 of the Provincial Insolvency Act, which enables the Court to call upon the insolvent to produce his books and to give inventories of his properties, etc., was intended to facilitate the work of the Court in finally adjudicating on the extent of the properties which are to be distributed among the various creditors...
In Re: Pullannavara Hanumantha
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-15-1919
Reported in: 53Ind.Cas.620
Moore, J.1. The petitioner and five other persons were convicted of the offence of rioting armed with deadly weapons (sections 148, Indian Penal Code). On appeal the Sessions Judge of Bellary altered the finding in the case of the petitioner (accused No. 1) to one under Sections 323, 511, Indian Penal Code, and maintained the sentence bat reversed the convictions of the other accused. The facfs, as found by the lower Courts, are shortly these. There had been ill feeling between accused No. 6 and prosecution witness No. 4, the Sub-Inspector of Polios of Kowtalam, and there was a charge against 6th accused of having wrongfully confined P. W. No. 4 and P. W. No. 8. The Sub-Inspector of Adoni, who had been deputed to investigate the case, learning that 6th accused had sent for some bad characters from Halvy to commit offences against the Police, deputed a party of Head Constables and Constables with instructions to watch the path from Halvy, and to catch any Halvy people or strangers who m...
Sena Yasim Sahib and anr. Vs. Kadur Ekambara Aiyar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-13-1919
Reported in: (1919)37MLJ698
Spencer, J. 1. The point of law argued in this second appeal is whether the trustee of a temple who himself mortgaged land which was afterwards sold in court auction at the instance of the mortgagee, can sue on behalf of the temple to recover the landlord's interest, which was dedicated to the temple by the trustee's father, or whether, he is estopped from setting up a claim against a bona fide purchaser for value that it is trust property. The District Munsif found that he was estopped and dismissed the suit. The Subordinate Judge in appeal reversed the District Muusif's decree and gave the plaintiff a decree for possession of the melvaram interest.2. Estoppel in pais creates a personal disability attaching to an individual and his representative of denying the truth of a thing which he has led others by his acts or representations to believe to be true.3. If a trustee alienates trust property for his own purposes he acts not as trustee but in breach or repudiation of his trust. There...
Ramakrishna Prabhu Vs. Naraina, Minor, by Guardian Ad Litem Anandivai ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-12-1919
Reported in: 62Ind.Cas.215
1. On the question whether the deed of gift executed by Bhagirathi Ammal in favour of the first defendant is voidable on the ground that it was obtained by undue influence, we agree entirely with the finding of the learned Subordinate Judge that to such case has been made out. We have been taken through the entire evidence, in order to find out whether any proof has been given of undue influence. But beyond some very vague statements there is really nothing which can be taken to be evidence of undue influence. Beyond the fast that the second defendant, father of the first defendant, was the manager of this lady's property for about three years before the execution of the document in question, Exhibit VII, there is nothing to show that he had any particular influence with the lady, mush less that he dominated her will so as to influence her to execute a deed of gift in favour of the son. The law requires that the plaintiff who sets up undue influence must, to start with, establish that ...
In Re: Gandi Apparazu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-11-1919
Reported in: (1920)38MLJ194
ORDER1. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner the 1st accused that the learned Sessions Judge had no jurisdiction to order his committal to the Sessions on charges under Sections 147 and 304 I.P.C. and that his order to that effect must be set aside.2. As regards the charge under Section 147 I.P.C. we think the contention is well founded, as the accused was acquitted by the Sub-Magistrate on that charge under Section 258 Criminal Procedure Code. So long as that order of acquittal stands, he cannot be again charged and tried for that offence on the same facts. Section 403 Cr. P. Code is a bar to it. It was not open to the Sessions judge to set aside that acquittal or to treat it merely as an order of discharge as he seems to have done. His order so far as it refers to Section 147 I.P., C. must therefore be set aside.3. But the charge under Section 304 I.P.C. stands on a different footing. Though the complaint alleged facts against this accused constituting an offence under Section...
K. Raghunatha Rao Vs. the Secretary of State for India in Council Thro ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-09-1919
Reported in: 60Ind.Cas.187; (1920)39MLJ623
1. The main question in this Appeal is whether the lower court was right in awarding compensation for the land acquired as cultivable land and not as a gravel quarry. The lower court refused to award as for a gravel quarry on the ground that the only demand for the produce of the land as a quarry came from the District Board, a public body on account of which the acquisition was made, and it referred to the proviso 1 of Section 24 of the Land Acquisition Act and the judgment of Lord Moulton In re Lucas and Chesterfield and Waterboard (1909) 1 K.B. 16 We need not say much regarding this part of the case because the learned Government Pleader has not disputed that the Lower Court erred in refusing to consider the character of the land as a gravel quarry. It is sufficient to refer to a quotation from the judgment of Mr. Justice Grove in In re Countess Ossalinsky and Manchester Corporation (Brown and Aliens law of Compensation, 2 Edn., page 659) extracted in the judgment of Vaughan William...
Raghunatha Row Vs. Secretary of State for India in Council
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-09-1919
Reported in: (1921)ILR44Mad264
1. The main question in this Appeal is whether the Lower Court was right in awarding compensation for the land acquired as cultivable land and not as a gravel quarry. The Lower Court refused to award compensation as for a gravel quarry on the ground that the only demand for the produce of the land as a quarry, came from the District Board, a public body, on account of which the acquisition was made, and it referred to proviso 1 of Section 24 of the Land Acquisition Act and the Judgment of Lord Moulton in In re Lucas and Chesterfield Gas and Water Board [1909] 1 K.B. 16. We need not say much regarding this part of the case, because the learned Government Pleader has not disputed that the Lower Court erred in refusing to consider the character of the land as a gravel quarry. It is sufficient to refer to a quotation from the judgment of Mr. Justice Grove in In re Countess Ossalinsky and Manchester Corporation (Brown and Allan's Law of Compensation, 2nd Edition, page 659) extracted in the ...
Thammanna Chinna Lakshiminarasimham and anr. Vs. Akarapu Venkanna Chen ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-08-1919
Reported in: (1920)38MLJ55
1. It is argued in this appeal that the 1st defendant on the one hand and the 2nd and 3rd defendants on the other settled their accounts and divided their business sometime in 1908 and therefore the appellants are not liable for any debts incurred in the course of the business since that date. The learned trial Judge has however found that this is not proved by the evidence and he gives strong reasons for his conclusions. Besides it is not sugges ed that if there was any division so far as this business was concerned, that the plaintiffs either knew of such a division or were informed of it.2. The next question argued is one of law, namely, whether the decree is right in so far as it makes the appellants' (2nd and 3rd defendants') shares in the family property liable for the amount of the decree. They were minors at the time of the transaction which gave raise to the debt, but it is found and not disputed that the trade in the course of which the debts were incurred was an ancestral fa...
The Tanjore Life Assurance Co. Ltd. by R. Sivarama Aiyar Vakil, Liquid ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-05-1919
Reported in: (1920)38MLJ135
Seshagiri Aiyar, J.1. Both the junior members of the bar who appeared in the case argued it very ably. The facts are not in dispute. A Policy was effected on the life of one Nagammal on the 29th May 1906. The premia were payable monthly. The assured made 61 payments, and then discontinued the payment. She died on the 6th April 1914 and the present suit was instituted on the 11th April 1917. The District Munsif dismissed the suit, In appeal the Subordinate Judge gave a decree for the amount of the premia paid by the deceased. I agree with the conclusion of the lower appellate Court though not for the reasons given by it.2. When the insurance was effected the rule of the Company stood thus: (See Exhibit E Clauses (b) and (c): 'The Policy-holders mentioned above who have been making payments duly in that manner will be paid interest at the rate of Rs. 6 per annum. It is only after the death of the Policy-holder that the life assurance amount will be determined. (c) If the present Policy-h...
S.A. Natesa Aiyar Vs. S.A. Manoyya Aiyar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-04-1919
Reported in: 54Ind.Cas.462
Krishnan, J.1. In this case the learned Subordinate Judge rejected petitioner's application for leave to sue in forma pauperis without any trial of the question of his pauperism, on the grounds that as regards a portion of his claim he had no cause of action and as regards the rest he was barred by limitation.2. The question of the existence or nonexistence of a cause of action in this case depended on whether petitioner's mother Baghirathi Ammal had obtained a life-estate or an absolute estate under the deed of settlement executed by his grandfather in 1885. He alleged in his petition that only a life estate had been granted to her and on that allegation his petition clearly disclosed a cause of action. The Subordinate Judge, however, referred to the deed of settlement, which was mentioned in the petition and had been filed along with it and was marked as Exhibit A and construing it he held that it gave Baghirathi an absolute estate, and that in consequence the petitioner had no cause...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »