Chennai Court October 1933 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.
Kamarsu Ramachendrarao Vs. Simhadri Rattayya and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-12-1933
Reported in: AIR1934Mad198; 148Ind.Cas.134
ORDER1. This is an appeal arising out of an application for the passing of a final decree in a mortgage suit under Rule 5 of order XXXIV, Civil Procedure Code. The lower Court allowed this application and passed a final decree accordingly. The order stands in the place of the judgment and the decree drawn up in pursuance of it is the final decree contemplated in the aforesaid rule That being so, the present appeal must be deemed to be one against the final decree so passed. In such an appeal, we think, it is open to the appellant to raise the contention that the final decree should not have been passed. But Mr. Appa Rao argues that he is entitled to file an appeal against an order directing the drawing up of a final decree, as if such an order has been passed in this case. Even so, he must be able to show that such an order is appealable. This is not an order against which an appeal is provided by order XXXIV of the Code of Civil Procedure. Nor does such an order amount to a decree, wi...
K.L. Krishna Ayyar Vs. T. Balakrishna Iyer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-11-1933
Reported in: (1934)66MLJ498
Pakenham Walsh, J.1. The Plaintiff, Counter-Petitioner, sued the Petitioner for the recovery of Rs. 2,111-6-3 as due on settlement of accounts in the purchase of silk sarees from the Plaintiff from 24th April, 1931.2. He put in an application for the appointment of a Receiver and at the same time he asked for an order that the defendant should produce the account books of his own sales of silk sarees, etc., into Court on the ground that if he were allowed to collect the amounts he would (para. 6 of affidavit) keep 'them in cash to cheat the Plaintiff ' and further that (para. 8) 'it is quite likely that the defendant is trying to keep false accounts and unless the account books are brought into the Court and a Receiver is appointed to collect the amounts due, there will be no way of realizing the money thereafter, after the decree is passed'.3. Admittedly the account books in question have nothing directly to say to the suit accounts on which the suit is brought. The Court ordered the ...
Sami Ayyangar and ors. Vs. Venkatramana Ayyangar and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-11-1933
Reported in: AIR1934Mad381; 150Ind.Cas.156
Venkatasubba Rao, J.1. On a construction of the entries in the Inam Register (Ex. 1), I am disposed to hold that the grant was not to the deity but was to Venkatachalla Ayyanger and that it was burdened with service. Column 15 of the Register shows that the name of Rama Ayyangar, Yenkataohalla's father, was entered in the account of 1803 (fasli 1213). The use of the word 'Devadayam' does not necessarily import that the grant was made to the temple, for the words, to which I attach great importance, are those that occur in Col. 21. They are to the following effect:To be confirmed to the patty in column 16 as long as he continues the performance of the services.2. The question whether the grant is to an institution represented by its manager, or to a named individual who fills a certain character, is often a difficult one. In this case, the 'present owner' is stated to be 'Kalyana Bamaswami Archaka Yenkataohala Ayyan' (Kalyana Bamaswami being the name of the deity). Whatever ambiguity ma...
K.L. Krishna Ayyar Vs. T. Balakrishna Ayyar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-11-1933
Reported in: 148Ind.Cas.79
Pakenham Walsh, J.1. The plaintiff, counter petitioner, sued the petitioner for the recovery of Rs. 2,111 6-3 as due on settlement of accounts in the purchase of silk sarees from the plaintiff from April 24, 1931.2. He put in an application for the appointment of a Receiver and at the same time he asked for an order that the defendant should produce the account books of his own sales of silk sarees etc. into Court on the ground that if he were allowed to collect the amounts he would (para. 6 of affidavit) keep them in cash to cheat the Plaintifi and further that (para. 8):It is quite likely that the defendant is trying to keep false accounts and unless the account books are brought into the Court and a Receiver is appointed to collect the amounts due, there will be no way of realising the money thereafter, after the decree is passed.3. Admittedly the account books in question have nothing directly to say to the suit accounts on which the suit is brought. The Court ordered the defendant...
Sundara Rajali Vs. Gopala thevan and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-10-1933
Reported in: AIR1934Mad100; 150Ind.Cas.132
Walsh, J.1. The plaintiff sued on a lost pronote which he said had been executed in his favour by the two defendants in June-July 1923. Defendant 2 is the mother of defendant 1. The parties are related in the following way: The plaintiff's wife is the daughter of a sister of defendant 2. Defendant 1 contested the suit. His mother, defendant 2, remained ex parte. Originally a decree was passed against both defendants ex parte on 22nd May 1929, but the suit was restored to file on 8th June 1929 on the application of defendant 1. Then plaintiff died and steps not having been taken to bring his legal representative on record the suit abated and was dismissed on 10th August 1929. On 26th October 1929 it was restored to file and plaintiff 2 added as the legal representative of plaintiff 1.2. Defendant 1 admitted the execution of the pronote, the amount of which, according to both parties was Rs. 100, but he said that only Bs. 80 was received, the other Rs. 20 being credited as a payment on t...
In Re: Patri Venkata Hanumantha Rao and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-06-1933
Reported in: (1934)66MLJ193
1. Of this batch of appeals, the first four have been preferred by A-1, A-8, A-2 and A-3 respectively and the last one by A-5 to A-7. The persons charged and tried in the Lower Court were eight, of whom the 4th accused was acquitted. The rest are the appellants before us. All these appellants were jointly charged for criminal conspiracy under Section 120-B, Indian Penal Code (charge No. I). The 1st accused was further charged under Section 409, Indian Penal Code, for criminal breach of trust in respect of moneys belonging to the Guntur Cooperative Urban Bank and held by him in trust for the said Bank, aggregating to Rs. 25,340 between 15th February, 1929 and 14th February, 1930. He was charged for a similar offence to the extent of Rs. 24,607-4-9 between 15th February, 1930 and 14th February, 1931 (charges Nos. II-A and II-B). The rest of the appellants were charged individually for abetment of criminal breach of trust committed by the 1st accused in respect of various sums under Secti...
Gnanambal Ammal Vs. S. Vadivelu Pillai and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-05-1933
Reported in: AIR1934Mad207; (1934)66MLJ351
Sundaram Chetty, J.1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred by Gnanambal Ammal, the mother of the minor Subbaraya Chetty, who was also appointed as the guardian of the person of the minor. By way of caution, a Civil Revision Petition is also filed. The order appealed against was passed by the District, Judge of South Arcot on a petition filed by S. Vadivelu Pillai (1st respondent) praying that a loan of Rs. 30,000 may be ordered to be given out of the minor's funds on a first mortgage of immoveable properties. The Court issued notices to the personal guardian, the outstandings guardian and the immoveable properties guardian of the minor in respect of that application. All the guardians stoutly opposed the petition, on the ground that the proposed investment is neither safe nor calculated to promote the best interests of the minor in view of the present economic depression in the country. The learned District Judge made an investigation and came to the conclusion that the a...
Thallur Narasimhulu Setty Vs. Kotha Seshayya
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-05-1933
Reported in: AIR1934Mad31; 147Ind.Cas.442
1. In this case we find that the order of the learned District Judge is substantially one passed in the exercise of his inherent powers to rectify an error apparent on the face of the record, or an error due to a misapprehension of the actual state of facts borne out by the record. It is beyond dispute that the original Insolvency Petition which stood adcurned for hearing to 22nd January 1926, was advanced to 22nd December 1925, and disposed of by the Court without notice to the insolvent. The insolvent applied for discharge within six months from 22nd January 1926. His application would be within time if the Insolvency Petition was taken up on the adjourned date of heading and the order of adjudication was passed on that date. But the Court acted under a misapprehension in dismissing his first application for discharge as out of time, and as a consequence of the dismissal annulled the adjudication. An error of this kind has been held to be one apparent on the face of the record, Muthu...
Thathamangalath and ors. Vs. Krishna Nambudripad and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-05-1933
Reported in: AIR1934Mad286
1. This appeal arises out of a suit instituted by the plaintiff to recover properties which are in the possession of the defendants. These properties belong to the-well-known Mallisseri illom an ancient and historic Nambudri family in South Malabar. This illom possesses considerable properties both in the British territory of South Malabar and in the Cochin State. The suit properties form only a very small portion of those situated in South Malabar. Defendant 1 claims right to the properties under Ex. A, a settlement deed executed by one Unnikali Antharjanam, wife of Mallisseri Krishnan Nambudri, by which he was adopted to the illom. Defendant 2 is the mother of defendant 1. The plaintiffs dispute the validity of the adoption and claim the properties as the reversionary heirs to the Mallisseri illom. The learned Subordinate Judge of South Malabar at Calicut upheld the adoption and dismissed the plaintiffs' suit. The following genealogical tree will explain the relationship of the parti...
(Gurram Pedda) Venkatappa Naidu Vs. (Gurram) Musal Naidu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-04-1933
Reported in: AIR1934Mad204; 150Ind.Cas.119
ORDER1. In this Civil Revision Petition the question to be decided is whether the documents marked as Exs. A and B, and described in the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, come within the definition of an instrument of partition, and if so, what is the correct stamp duty payable on them? Both these documents are styled as partition lists, one of them relating to the properties allotted to the share of Gurram Musal Naidu (defendant 1) and the other relating to the properties allotted to the share of Gurram Pedda Venkat-appa Naidu (the plaintiff). In order to determine the nature of these two lists put together, we have to pay attention to certain significant recitals contained in them. Ex. A begins with a sort of preamble as follows:List (of bonds, etc.) which fell to the share of Gurram Musal Naidu in the matter of the determination of the shares of Gurram Musal Naidu, his first wife's son Pedda Venkatappa Naidu and Vengamma, wife of Ghenganna Naidu, in the bonds, documents, hand ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »