Chennai Court December 1926 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.
Nukala Subbayya Vs. Naragam Kristayya
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-20-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Mad488; (1927)52MLJ390
Devadoss, J.1. The contention of Mr. Venkatachalam for the appellant is that the suit is barred under Article 12 of the Limitation Act. This question of limitation was not pressed before the Lower Appellate Court and was not put in issue in the first Court. Though the written statement vaguely says that the plaintiff's suit is barred by limitation, yet no issue was taken on it and the plaintiff had no opportunity of meeting the point. It is urged that the point being one of limitation it can be raised at any time. Granting that the appellant is entitled to raise the point here, I am satisfied that Article 12 of the Limitation Act has no application to the present case. The clause under which the suit is sought to be brought is Clause (b) of Article 12 which deals with 'sale in pursuance of a decree or order of a Collector or other officer of revenue'.2. A sale under Section 118 of the Estates Land Act is not by virtue of an order or a decree of a Collector or other officer of revenue. ...
In Re: M.A. Kaleek Alias James Cooper
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-20-1926
Reported in: (1927)52MLJ511
Wallace, J.1. The first point raised in the appeal is that the Madras Court had no jurisdiction. The facts, for the purpose of the argument, are that accused sent from Madras by value payable parcel to P.W. 3 at Hyderabad, in consequence of an order by P.W. 3 to him for four boxes of tea, four boxes of which P.W. 3 got delivery at Hyderabad on payment of the value payable amount of Rs. 168 and that when P.W. 3 opened the boxes he found they contained saw dust. Thus, in consequence of the false representation made by accused that he was sending four boxes of tea, P.W. 3 was deceived and thereby induced to pay over the value payable amount to the post office for payment to accused. It is urged for appellant that the delivery of the money in consequence of the deceit was wholly in Hyderabad. The Crown Prosecutor contends that the delivery was not complete until the Post Office had handed the money to accused, at Madras. I do not think the latter contention is sound. The delivery contempla...
Muthuswami Pillai Vs. Sandana Velan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-20-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Mad649; 101Ind.Cas.619; (1927)53MLJ218
1. The 1st defendant sold the plaint land for a sum of Rs. 2,000 purporting to act for himself and his minor sons. In the description of the property it was stated that the land had been purchased by the 1st defendant out of his self-earnings and was in his possession and enjoyment. Rs. 100 out of the sale price was paid at the time of the execution of the sale deed. The plaintiff brought this suit for recovery of possession of the suit property and made the 1st defendant and his two minor sons parties to the suit. The District Mun-sif dismissed the suit. On appeal the Subordinate Judge gave the plaintiff a decree that he was entitled to a half share of the suit property and symbolical possession of the same on condition of his depositing Rs. 900 which represented the balance due for the price of half the property. The 2nd defendant had died during the appeal. It was therefore held by the Subordinate Judge that the plaintiff, under Section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act, was entitl...
Kommaraju Narasimham and anr. Vs. Kolli Sobhanadri and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-20-1926
Reported in: 101Ind.Cas.157; (1927)52MLJ632
Wallace, J.1. The first question for decision in the petition is whether the words 'final decree of a competent Civil Court establishing that the ryot has no occupancy right' in the last clause of Section 3(7) of the Madras Estates Land Act imply that the decree relied on must contain these ipsissima verba or whether they mean any decree in which the occupancy right has been and ought to have been specifically in issue in the suit and has therefore been explicitly or implicitly decided in the suit in which the decree was passed. The District Judge has taken the former view and the trial Court the latter. I think the District Judge's view is wrong and too narrowly construes the words of the clause. The result of such a construction would be that where a decree is in such terms that the tenants cannot in the face of it set up occupancy rights but does not expressly say that they have no occupancy rights, the tenants may nevertheless successfully maintain against the landlord in any subse...
Kommaraju Narasimham and anr. Vs. Kolli Sobhabadi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-20-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Mad610
Wallace, J.1. The first question for decision in the petition is whether the words 'final decree of a competent civil Court establishing that the ryot has no occupancy right' in the last clause of Section 3 (7) of the Madras Estates Land Act imply that the decree relied on must contain these ipsissima verba, or whether they mean any decree in which the occupancy right has been and ought to have been specifically in issue in the suit and has therefore been explicitly or implicitly decided in the suit in which the decree was passed. The District Judge has taken the former view and the trial Court the latter. I think the District Judge's view is wrong and too narrowly construes the words of the clause. The result of such a construction would be that where a decree is in such terms that the tenants cannot in the face of it set up occupancy rights but does not expressly say that they have no occupancy rights, the tanants may never the less successfully maintain against the landlord in any s...
M.A. Kaleek Alias James Cooper Vs. Emperor
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-20-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Mad544; 101Ind.Cas.484
Wallace, J.1. The first point raised in the appeal is that the Madras Court had no jurisdiction. The facts, for the purpose of the argument, are that accused sent from Madras by value payable parcel to P.W. No. 3 at Hyderabad, in consequence of an order by P.W. No. 3 to him for four boxes of tea, four boxes of which P.W. No. 3 got delivery at Hyderabad on payment of the value payable amount of Rs. 168 and that when P.W. No. 3 opened the boxes he found they contained saw-dust. Thus in consequence of the false representation made by accused that he was sending four boxes of tea, P.W. No. 3 was deceived and thereby induced to pay over the value payable amount to the Post Office for payment to accused. It is urged for appellant that the delivery of the money in consequence of the deceit was wholly in Hyderabad. The Crown Prosecutor contends that the delivery was not complete until the Post Office handed the money to accused at Madras. I do not think the latter contention is sound. [A] The ...
Venkatachala Mudaliar Vs. Sambasiva Mudaliar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-17-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Mad465; (1927)52MLJ288
Devadoss, J.1. This appeal raises a novel and interesting question. The plaintiff's suit is for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants and other villagers of Parniputtur from pulling down an old temple in the place and removing the image from the present premises. Both the Lower Courts have dismissed the plaintiff's suit on the ground that almost the whole village was for the removal of the temple and the image to a site more sanitary and more acceptable to the inhabitants. The plaintiff has preferred this second appeal. As the point is one of some importance and as there is no direct authority on the point, I asked Mr. N. Rajagopalachari, High Court Vakil, to appear as amicus curiae for the idol.2. The plaintiff's case is that there is an old temple dedicated to Vinayagar, that there is now a consecrated image in it, that the defendants and other inhabitants of the village are now attempting to pull down the temple and remove the stone image from the consecrated Moolasthana...
In Re: V. Kandasami Aiyar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-17-1926
Reported in: (1927)52MLJ703
ORDERWallace, J.1. Cr.R.C. No. 521 of 1926: The petitioner was the Sub-Postmaster of Nandikotur and he has been convicted of offences under Sections 409 and 477-A.I.P.C.2. The facts found by the Lower Court are that having received a V.P. letter to be delivered to P.W. 4 on payment of the V.P. amount of Rs. 192, he handed over the letter to him without getting payment on or before 20th October, 1925 and then altered his accounts so as to make it appear that he only handed over the letter on 24th October, 1925. On these facts the Lower, Appellate Court has held that he was guilty of criminal breach of trust and falsification of accounts.3. It is contended here that on the facts these criminal offences have not been made out and therefore the conviction cannot stand. As regards the criminal breach of trust it is argued that the mere handing over of a V.P. letter to the consignee without getting the money does not amount to a criminal breach of trust. I do not think the contention is soun...
Palacherla Venkanna and ors. Vs. Yermati Venkanna and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-17-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Mad706
1. We regret we are unable to accept the finding of the learned Subordinate Judge that the assent of the sapindas, relied on and proved in this case, is 'not enough.' At one part of his judgment he says:The consent seems to have been obtained -by the representation that the husband had given her authority to adopt.2. If this sentence is the only sentence in the judgment it may be possible to argue that he meant to give a finding that the consent was obtained by such representation and no weight is to be attached to the word 'seems'. But, later on, he said: 'for aught one knows, they might simply have relied on the representation, etc.' This later sentence shows that he had in his mind only the possibility that the consent was obtained by such representation. All that he meant to find was that the defendants did not displace such possibility. It seems to us that a finding of this kind is not enough to reject the sapinda's assent.3. It is true that a sapinda's assent, to be the foundatio...
V. Kandasami Ayyar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-17-1926
Reported in: 102Ind.Cas.488
ORDERWallace, J.1. The petitioner was the Sub Post Master of Nandikotkur and he has been convicted of offences under Sections 409 and 477-A, Indian Penal Code.2. The facts found by the lower Court are that having received a V.P. letter to be delivered to P.W. No. 4 on payment of the V.P. amount of Rs. 192 he handed over the letter to him without getting payment on or before 20th October, 1925, and then altered his accounts so as to make it appear that he only handed over the letter on 24th October 1925, On these facts the lower Appellate Court has held that he was guilty of criminal breach of trust and falsification of accounts.3. It is contended here that on the facts these criminal offences have not been made out, and, therefore, the conviction cannot stand. As regards the criminal breach of trust it is argued that the mere handing over of a V.P. letter to the consignee without getting the money does not amount to criminal breach of trust. I do not think the contention is sound.4. Th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »