Chennai Court July 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.
Ayyasami Chetty Vs. the Official Receiver
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-13-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Mad63; (1931)61MLJ719; 1932 61 MLJ 719
Anantakrishna Aiyar, J.1. This is an application filed under Section 75 of the Provincial Insolvency Act (V of 1920) and also under Section 107 of the Government of India Act tasking the High Court to revise the order passed by the District Judge of Coimbatore in C.M.A. No. 51 of 1927. One Vedam Chetty was declared insolvent in I.P. No. 6 of 1923 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court of Coimbatore. Time for applying for discharge was extended from time to time and it was finally extended to 9th January, 1927. The petitioner before me, who is the father of the insolvent and who also was an alienee from the insolvent, applied on 21st December, 1926, to have the adjudication of the insolvent annulled under Section 43 of the Provincial Insolvency Act. Notice of this application (I.A. No. 121 of 1927) was served upon the Official Receiver. On the 14th March, 1927, the Official Receiver applied to the Court to have time for discharge extended till 9th January, 1928. Evidently expectin...
Ramji Das Mahant Bavajee, Matathipathi of Udasi Mutt Vs. Kumarakalathi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-13-1931
Reported in: (1931)61MLJ710
Anantakrishna Aiyar, J.1. This is an application for revision, filed by the 2nd defendant in S.C.S. No. 661 of 1927 on the file of the District Munsif of Conjeevaram. A decree was passed in the suit on 17th August, 1927, against the 2nd defendant among others, the 2nd defendant not appearing at the date of the adjourned hearing. On 15th September, 1927, the 2nd defendant filed an application in the Lower Court under Order 9, Civil Procedure Code, read with Section 17 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act. Under Section 17, the 2nd defendant-petitioner had to deposit in Court within 30 days the amount due under the decree in question. The 2nd defendant paid into the hands of his vakil on the 15th September, 1927, the necessary amount. The account books of the vakil have been filed and they support the 2nd defendant's plea that the necessary funds were paid into the hands, of the vakil on 15th September, 1927. Before the money is actually paid into the Court the party has to apply for...
Gorantala Parvatamma Vs. Veeragandam Subbayya
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-13-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Mad144
1. This appeal by defendant 3 arises out of a suit for partition filed on behalf of the plaintiff a minor at the time of the suit by his next friend, his maternal uncle, against defendant 1, his uncle, defendant 2 his father, and defendant 3 daughter of defendant 1. After the suit was filed, defendant 4 was born with the result that the plaintiff's share was reduced from one-fourth to one-sixth. The plaintiff got a decree below. Defendant 3 files this appeal in respect of two items of immovable property: (1) 2 1/2 cents in item 40 of Schedule A and 2.2 acres of dry land in item 51 of Schedule A and an item of debt. Defendant 3 claimed in her written statement that the two former items did not belong to the joint family but belonged to herself. The Subordinate Judge found this point against her and gave a decree for the plaintiff in respect of these two items also. Hence she appeals. Taking these items in succession, the sale deed for the first item of 2 1/2 cents is Ex. 4. The Survey N...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›