Chennai Court March 1931 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.
Medasani Vallayya and ors. Vs. Bommadevara Satyanarayana Vara Prasada ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Mad554; 140Ind.Cas.92
Wallace, J.1. This series of second appeals is from the judgment of the lower appellate Court in a batch of similar suits. The plaintiff is the Zamindar of South Vallur and the defendants are his raiyats. Certain palmyra trees stand on the holdings of the defendants. Bach party claims these as his possession absolutely. The defendants have been enjoying the usufruct of these trees chiefly by tapping them for country liquor. The plaintiff came into Court on the footing that this enjoyment of the defendants was a trespass on his rights and caused wrongful loss to him and he sued to recover the estimated loss. He originally filed his suits on the small cause side and they were transferred to the original side and tried there. The trial Court and the lower appellate Court decided in favour of the plaintiff and the defendants appeal.2. The plaintiff takes a preliminary objection that no second appeal lies because the suits are of small cause nature and the amount sued for is under Rs. 500. ...
(B. Rajarajeswara Sethupathi) Rajah of Ramnad and anr. Vs. Chona Raman ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-1931
Reported in: AIR1931Mad609
Pandalai, J.1. The defendant appeals from a decree by which the lower Court has ordered him to pay damages to the extent of Rs. 14-11-3 to the respondent. The suit was brought under Section 213, Estates Land Act, for damages for recovery, by compulsion of legal process, of arrears of rent which were not due. The facts are not disputed. The respondent is the present ryot in possession of a piece of land, No. 63, Annadhana Maniam in the appellant's zamindari, which is registered as 'fysal nanja' or ancient wet, but which has subsequently been planted with fruit trees, palmyrah, etc., According to the custom of the appellant's zamindari, where wet land is allowed to remain uncultivated or where it is used for the cultivation of less remunerative crops, such as dry crops or plantain, or fruit trees, it is open to the zamindar to claim what is known as 'sarasari,' namely rent calculated on the average yield of wet lands in the village. In short he is not bound to suffer by the use to which ...
In Re: Sellappa Goundan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-05-1931
Reported in: (1931)61MLJ222
ORDER1. The respondent here was charged in the Lower Court with having murdered one Palani Goundan on the 28th June last by hitting him on the head with the handle of an axe. The facts of the case need not be stated and it is sufficient to say that the respondent appears to have lost his temper at the interference of the deceased in his quarrel with P.W. 3 and to have acted in the manner described. The learned Sessions Judge convicted him of an offence under Section 304, latter part, holding that there was no intention on the part of the respondent to cause the death of the deceased man and ordered him to be detained in the Borstal School at Palamcottah for five years. He did so because he found that the respondent was an adolescent offender within the meaning of Section 2 of the Madras Borstal Schools Act (V of 1926). It is quite clear that in the opinion of the doctor who was examined as a Court witness the respondent who gave his age as 15 was about 20 years old and certainly more t...
Collector of Chingleput Vs. Krishnaveni Ammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-05-1931
Reported in: AIR1933Mad190; 145Ind.Cas.604
1. This is an appeal from the decree of the Subordinate Judge of Chingleput in a matter wherein the claimant, the respondent to the present appeal, is claiming compensation under the Land Acquisition Act for the acquisition by Government of 377' 55 acres of land. As to 366 acres 23 cents the claimant has melwaram rights. As to the remaining 11 acres 32 cents the claimant claims as owner of the land. Of this land 11'32 acres are burdened by ponds, and 3 acres 50 cents are burdened by roads or pathways. The lands are all situate in Mambalam village and the notification is dated, 25th May 1920 which is before the passing of the Amending Act of 1923, so that the critical date in determining the market value of the rights acquired is the date of the notice under Section 6 which is 25th May aforesaid. The land acquisition officer, as to the item for roads and pathways, has allowed nothing for the reason, stated by him at pp. 11 and 12 of the pleadings, that the pathways are in public use and...
Sri Iswarananda Bharathi Swami of Ednir Mutt Vs. the Board of Commissi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-04-1931
Reported in: AIR1931Mad574; (1931)61MLJ117
Cornish, J.1. The plaintiff sued for a declaration that the building in which he resides and in which the worship of the deity, Sri Gopalakrishna Devaru, is performed, though it is popularly called the Ednir Math, is not an institution to which Madras Religious Endowments Act II of 1927 applies.2. The plaint was filed on 17th April, 1928. The defendant, the Religious Endowments Board, had by its order, dated 27th April, 1927, after giving notice to the plaintiff and holding an inquiry, decided that the institution was a math within the Hindu Religious Endowments Act. This order of the Board, as appears from para. 6 of the plaint, is the cause of action on which the plaintiff founds his suit. The learned District Judge has held that the suit is barred by Section 84(2) of the Act and has dismissed it, and we think that he was right.3. A math as defined by the Act, Section 9(7), means:An institution for the promotion of the Hindu religion presided over by a person whose duty is to engage ...
Marappureddigari Sayamma and anr. Vs. R. Venkata Reddi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-04-1931
Reported in: AIR1931Mad785; (1931)61MLJ437
Stone, J.1. This appeal raises a short point, viz., whether the deed of mortgage, dated 4th January, 1917, in favour of one Chinnayya Chetti Garu provides for interest on the capital sum of Rs. 6,500 at the rate of Rs. 2 per month on the Rs. 6,500 or at the rate of Rs. 2 per centum per month. The said mortgage was attached by the decree-holder in E.P. No. 2 of 1925 and the plaintiff in this present action is the receiver therein.2. The plaint makes no claim for rectification of this instrument, and issue 2 expressly raises the question whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover under this deed interest at the rate of Rs. 2 per cent. per month without rectification. Issue 1 appears to raise the question whether as a matter of construction this deed reserves to the mortgagee interest at the rate of Rs. 2 per cent. per month or at the rate of Rs. 2 per month. Why the plaintiff declined to ask for rectification can only be a matter of speculation. In fact he did not and proceeded to clai...
(His Holiness Srila Sri) Vythilinga Pandara Sannadhi Avergal, Athinaka ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-04-1931
Reported in: AIR1931Mad801
Curgenven, J.1. The plaintiff sued to establish his right as hereditary trustee of the Sri Papavinasaswami Temple at Vikramasingapuram village in Ambasamudrum Taluk of the Tinnevelly District, and for certain consequential reliefs. The plaint alleges that the Temple Committee, defendant 1, in disregard of the plaintiff's hereditary right as trustee, had held that he had vacated office under Section 51, Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act and had appointed defendant 2 as sole trustee of the temple. The learned Subordinate Judge of Tinnevelly has found that a suit of this character is barred by the provisions of the Act above referred to, and this is the sole question which we have to decide in appeal.2. There is ample authority for the view that a suit to establish a personal right of this character does not fall within the terms of Section 92, Civil P. C. It is true that in Subramania Pillai v. Krishnaswamy Somayajiar [1919]42Mad.668 a suit by two out of three trustees of a temple fo...
Sri Rajah Rao Venkatakumara Mahipathi Surya Rao Bahadur Garu, the Maha ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-03-1931
Reported in: AIR1931Mad626; (1931)61MLJ111
Madhavan Nair, J.1. These two applications relate to the same subject-matter, that is, a sum of Rs. 6,218-14-3 standing to the credit of C.S. No. 229 of 1924 and representing the income from the mortgaged properties involved in that suit other than Misquith Buildings and Cathedral Gardens. In the one, the receiver is asked to deposit the amount in Court and in the other, that is, Application No. 244 of 1931, a request is made that the same sum may be paid over to the plaintiff in the suit, the Maharaja of Pittapuram, who is the petitioner in both the applications. The Official Assignee of Madras and the plaintiff in C. S. No. 622 of 1923 oppose these applications.2. The facts necessary for the disposal of these applications may be stated very briefly as follows : One Gokuldoss, manager of a joint Hindu family, trading under the style of Murlidoss Ramdoss & Co., effected on behalf of the firm an equitable mortgage by depositing title-deeds of ten items of properties with the petitioner,...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›