Chennai Court January 1924 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.
Narayanaswamy Devaroyar Vs. Thangavelu Padayachi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-22-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Mad800
Venkata Subba Rao, J.1. On the death of Kuppuswmi in the year 1885 there appear to have been some negotiations regarding a provision for suitable maintenance to his widow Alamelu. In 1890 Exhibit 1 executed by which the surviving coparceners gifted to Alamelu certain portions of family property in lieu of her right to maintenance. She was in enjoyment of the property from that date till her death. The defendant as now in occupation of it claiming under a will executed by Alamelu. The lower, courts have found that the will is genuine and that finding must be accepted. The question to be decided, is, did Alamelu have an absolute interest in the property? On behalf of the plaintiff it is argued that the deed of gift was unregistered and could consequently confer no title on Alamelu. This argument is perfectly correct. But Alamelu was in enjoyment of the property for over the statutory period, in fact, for about 23 years. Exhibit I. is not operative as a deed of gift as it was not register...
The Secretary of State for India-in-council Represented by the Collect ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-22-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Mad913
Ayling, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of water-cess alleged to have been illegally levied by Government. It appears that the plaintiff took the water on account of which the cess was levied from a channel, which passed through his patta land, but was not separately demarcated as poramboke. The fact has been treated by both the lower Courts as conclusive against Government as to the legality of the levy; reliance being placed on a passage in a judgment in Kalianna Mudali v. Secretary of State 31 Ind.Cas. 982 which runs as follows:As to the claim to levy water-cess, these rills run through plaintiff's patta land, and their beds have not been separately demarcated as poramboke; they are part of the patta land and not the property of the Government, and therefore the water course cannot be said to belong to Government as derided day before yesterday in Appeal Suit No. 113 of 1910 (on the file of the High Court).2. The learned Government Pleader in second appeal ...
Maharaja of Kolhapur Vs. S. Sundaram Ayyar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-21-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Mad497
Spencer, Offg.C.J.1. In A.D. 1674 during the reign of the great Mogul Emperor Aurangzeb, Ekoji alias Venkaji took Tanjore from its Nayak Rulers without firing a shot. This Mahratta General was the son of Shabji who had attained military distinction under the independent Muhamadan States of Ahmednugger and Bijipur and in the course of one of his military expeditions had levied a contribution from the Nayak Chiefs of Taujore and Madura in the South Carnatic country.2. Ekoji's grandfather was Malloji, a Mahratta of the Bhonsle family, who distinguished himself under Jadava or Jadow Bow, a Mahratta Chief in the service of the Ahmednugger Government, and won the hand of his daughter Jiji Bai for his elder son Shahji. Shahji by his first wife Jiji Bai waa the father of the famous Sivaji who founded the Mahratta Empire in the Deccan in the 17th century, and by his second wife Tukka Bai, daughter of Mahratta parents with the surname of Mohitai, was the father of Ekoji, the founder of the Mahra...
Maharaja of Kolhapur Vs. S. Sundaram Ayyar and 15 ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-21-1924
Reported in: (1925)ILR68Mad1
Charles Gordon Spencer, Officiating C.J.1. In A.D. 1674 during the reign of the great Moghul Emperor Aurangzeb, Ekoji alias Venkaji took Tanjore from its Nayak Rulers without firing a shot. This Mahratta General was the son of Shahji who had attained military distinction under the independent Muhamadan States of Ahmednugger and Bijapur and in the course of one of his military expeditions had levied a contribution from the Nayak Chiefs of Tanjore and Madura in the South Carnatic country.2. Ekoji's grandfather was Malloji, a Mahratta of the Bhonsle family, who distinguished himself under Jadava or Jadow Rao, a Mahratta Chief in the service of the Ahmednugger Government, and won the hand of his daughter Jiji Bai for his elder son Shahji. Shahji by his first wife Jiji Bai was the father of the famous Sivaji who founded the Mahratta Empire in the Deccan in the 17th century, and by his second wife Tukka Bai, daughter of Mahratta parents with the surname of Mohitai, was the father of Ekoji, t...
Seshamma (Widow and Legal Representative of the Deceased Manchiraju Na ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-18-1924
Reported in: (1924)47MLJ235
Wallace, J.1. This appeal is against the order of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Cocanada, setting aside an abatement of a suit, the order appealed against being passed under Order 22, Rule 9. In ordinary circumstances, no appeal lies against such an order, but in the circumstances of this case it is contended that the order appealed against was passed without jurisdiction and vitiated by material irregularity. 2. The plaintiff, who is the respondent in this, appeal, sued one M. Narayana Rao in the Court of the District Munsif of Peddapur on a mortgage and on 27th November, 1918, obtained a preliminary decree. It since transpired that the judgment-debtor died on the morning of 27th November, 1918, before the decree was passed. The plaintiff admits that, not long after the decree, he came to know of the fact of the death of the judgment-debtor, but not of the actual date of it, and assumed that he had died after the decree and that therefore the decree was valid. He took no steps to ...
Rallabandy Venkataratnam and ors. Vs. Yanamandra Satyavati and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-18-1924
Reported in: (1924)46MLJ383
Odgers, J.1. This is an appeal against the order of the District Judge of Godavari whereby he dismissed the appellant's petition to revoke a probate under Section 50 Probate and Administration Act. The previous history of the case is set out in the learned District Judge's order. The only facts we need consider are the following an application was made by the widow of one Appa Rao, deceased, in 1908 for letters of Administration to his estate with the will annexed. The will is printed at page 17 of the documents in A. A. O. No. 275 of 1920 and it is to be noted that the only property of the testator on which it could take effect was a sum of insurance money Rs. 1,000. The father of the testator entered a caveat to the proceedings of 1908 but withdrew it apparently in consequence of an agreement (printed at page 5 of the documents in appeal No. 110/115 ) to which this (1st) appellant inter alias was a party. The agreement shortly provided that the widow should take the Rs. 1,000, should...
R. Viswanatha Pillai Vs. T.K. Periaswami Pillai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-18-1924
Reported in: (1924)46MLJ491
1. This petition relates to an election held in the Trichinopoly Municipality, and the only question for consideration is whether certain ballot papers that were then recorded are valid or not. These ballot papers are objected to on the ground that they infringe Rule 17 (1) of the Rules for the conduct of Elections of Municipal Councillors. That Rule is as follows: 'Any ballot paper which is not duly marked, or on which votes are given to more candidates than there are members to be elected, or on which any mark is made by which the voters may afterwards be identified, shall be invalid. ' In the present case the contention before the District Judge of Trichinopoly was that these votes were invalid, because the polling officer had initialed the ballot papers not only on the back as directed in Rule 14 (1) but had also placed his initials on the face. This placing of initials on the face does not per se contravene Rule 14 (1) and we agree with the District Judge that in itself it cannot ...
Chockalingam Pillai Vs. Sami Batter and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-18-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Mad426
Odgers, J.1. In this second appeal it is contended that the Additional Sub-ordinate Judge has not dealt in the right way with the first issue which was:Is the plaintiff a legitimate son of the deceased Veerabhadra Pillai?'2. Under ordinary circumstances, one would say that the findings of both the learned District Munsif and of the Subordinate Judge were questions of fact on the evidence. But Mr. Sesha Iyengar for the appellant has raised a point with regard to the decision of this first issue in that he says that what the Subordinate Judge has done is really to throw the onus of proving legitimacy on his client instead of starting with the presumption of legitimacy in his favour.3. The learned District Munsif found the legitimacy of the plaintiff by reason of certain evidence, Exhibit E series, which it is not contended can be legitimately used; so that the ground on which the District Munsif decided has now definitely gone.4. The Subordinate Judge has come to a contrary decision on a...
Chocklingam Pillai Vs. Sami Battar and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-18-1924
Reported in: 79Ind.Cas.623
Odgers, J.1. In this second appeal it is contended that the Additional Subordinate Judge has not dealt in the right way with the first issue which was.Is the plaintiff a legitimate son of the deceased Veerabhadra Pillai?2. Under ordinary circumstances, one would say that the finding of both the learned District Munsif and of the Subordinate Judge were questions of fact on the evidence. But Mr. Sesha Iyengar for the appellant has raised a point with regard to the decision of this first issue in that he says that what the Subordinate Judge has done is really to throw the onus of proving legitimacy on his client instead of starting with the presumption of legitimacy in his favour. The learned District Munsif found the legitimacy of the plaintiff by reason of certain evidence, Ex. B Series, which it is not contended can be legitimately used; so that the ground on which the District Munsif decided has now definitely gone. The Subordinate Judge has come to a contrary decision on a considerat...
Venkatarathnam and ors. Vs. Satyavati and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-18-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Mad578
Odgers, J.1. This is an appeal against the order of the District Judge of Godavari whereby he dismissed the appellant's petition to revoke a probata under Section 50, Probate and Administration Act. The previous history of the case is set out in she learned District Judge's order. The only facts we need consider are the following: an application was made by the widow of one Appa Rao, deceased in 1908, for Letters of Administration to his estate with the will annexed. The will is printed at page 17 of the documents in A.A.O. No. 275 of 1920, and it is to be noted that the only property of the testator on which it could take effect was a sum of insurance money, Rs. 1,000. The father of the testator entered a caveat to the proceedings of 1908 but withdrew it apparently in consequence of an agreement (printed at page 5 of the documents in appeal No. 110 of 1915) to which this (1st) appellant inter alias was a party. The agreement shortly provided that the widow 3hould take the Rs. 1,000, s...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »