Chennai Court August 1937 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.
Chintalapudi Venkataramayya Vs. Potula Venkataramayya and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-06-1937
Reported in: AIR1938Mad78
Venkataramana Rao, J.1. The question in this second appeal is whether Section 47, Civil P.C., operates as a bar to the maintenance of the suit instituted by the plaintiff for a declaration that the transfer of a decree obtained by defendant 1 against him in favour of defendant 2 is invalid. Both the lower Courts took the view that it does not. This view is canvassed in second appeal. The question is whether it is sound. The material facts bearing on the question are these: Defendant 1, Rednam Sitaramiah obtained a decree in S.C.S. No. 208 of 1926 on the file of the District Munsif's Court of Amalapuram on 9th August 1926 against the plaintiff Potula 'Venkataramayya and another. Defendant 2 obtained a transfer of the said decree on 17th' February 1927, under Ex. 3-A, and as the transfer deed was defective, a later transfer was effected on 12th March 1927, under Ex. C. In pursuance of that transfer defendant 2 applied on 22nd March 1927 for leave to execute the decree Under Order 21, Rul...
Muthu Rama Reddi Vs. Motilal Daga, Trading Under Name and Style of Sai ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-06-1937
Reported in: AIR1938Mad113
Lakshmana Rao, J.1. This appeal arises out of an application for transmission of the decree in O.S. No. 72 of 1922 on the file of the Subordinate Judge of Cocanada for execution to the District Court of South Arcot and the questions for determination are (1) whether the application is barred by limitation against the appellant (defendant 3) and (2) whether the decree is executable against him. Respondent 1 is the decree-holder and the suit was for recovery of Rs. 28,374-11-9 due under two promissory notes executed by the appellant and respondents 2 and 3. The appellant pleaded that he was a surety and the suit was decreed on 19th February 1923 as follows:It is ordered and decreed that the plaintiff (respondent 1) do proceed against defendants 1 and 2 (respondents 2 and 3) in the first instance and against defendant 3 (appellant) in case the amount cannot be releted from defendants 1 and 2 and do recover Rs. 26,777-4-9 with further interest and proportionate coats.2. A sum of Rs. 3,652-...
C.S. Mahadeva Iyer Vs. Municipal Council
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-06-1937
Reported in: AIR1937Mad894; 175Ind.Cas.625
ORDERLeach, C.J.1. This petition raises the question whether the petitioner who in 1931 was the District Judge of Kistna with headquarters at Masulipatam is liable to the Municipal Council of Masulipatam in the sum of Rs. 93-10-0 by way of profession tax. The petitioner was appointed the District Judge of Kistna on April 1, 1931. The Court closed for the vacation on May 4, 1931, and the petitioner left Masulipatam never to return, although he remained the District Judge, of Kistna, until July 31, 1931, when he retired. The Court reopened after the vacation on July 6, 1931. On April 22, 1931, that is before the Court closed for the vacation, the Government of Madras granted to the petitioner leave on average pay from July 6, to July 30, with permission to prefix the period of the vacation. By the same order the Government appointed an Additional Sessions, Judge with headquarters at Bllore in order that criminal cases could be dealt with in the meantime. The petitioner was actually in Ma...
The M. and S.M. Ry. Co. Ltd. Vs. Garimella Satynarayana and Sons and a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-05-1937
Reported in: AIR1938Mad206; (1937)2MLJ798
Venkataramana Rao, J.1. These two appeals arise out of two suits brought for the recovery of damages for non-delivery of the goods entrusted to the first defendant the M. & S.M. Railway Company through the second defendant their out-agency contractor. Both the receipt of the goods and non-delivery are admitted. The Railway Company sought to escape from their obligation by relying upon the Risk-note Form B in pursuance of which the goods were entrusted to them for carriage. They pleaded that the goods were lost by fire while they were kept in a shed near the Nidadavole railway station and therefore they were not guilty of any misconduct and that unless misconduct is proved against them they cannot be rendered liable. The lower Subordinate Judge found that the Railway Company failed to prove that the goods were lost by fire. He came to the said conclusion on a consideration of both the oral and documentary evidence in the case. Mr. Somasundaram sought to canvass that finding before us. W...
J. Ganesh Lala Vs. Ratan Bai and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-05-1937
Reported in: AIR1937Mad976; 173Ind.Cas.769
1. The learned advocate for the respondents cannot support the order of the lower Court in so far as it appointed respondent 1 to be the guardian of the minor girl. There was no application to appoint a guardian for the girl and we agree with Mr. A.V. Narayanaswamy Ayyar, advocate for the appellant, that the learned District Judge's order was without jurisdiction in so far as the girl was concerned. As for the boy, it is clear from the circumstances of the case that the mother, respondent 1, is not a proper guardian. She is a Hindu widow who has now married a Christian. The boy should ordinarily be brought up as a Hindu like his father; a Christian household is no proper house for him: vide Skinner v. Orde (1870-72) 14 MIA 309.2. The appeal is therefore allowed and the learned District Judge's order appointing the mother as personal guardian of the minors is set aside. We are asked by Mr. Somasundaram, advocate for the respondents, to send the case back for further inquiry but we see n...
E.Su. NA. Sheikh Davood Rowther and ors. Vs. N.R.M.N. Ramanathan Chett ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-04-1937
Reported in: AIR1938Mad43
Venkataramana Rao, J.1. These two appeals arise out of a suit to enforce a security bond dated 3rd August 1924 alleged to have been executed by defendants 1 to 5. The learned District Judge of Trichinopoly passed a decree for the amount claimed against all the defendants. Defendant 2 has not preferred an appeal and the decree against him has become final. Defendant 1 and defendants 3 to 5 have preferred appeals; Appeal No. 304/34 is by defendants 3 to 5 and Appeal No. 305/ 34 is by defendant 1. Defendants 1 to 4 are brothers and defendant 5 is their sister. The case of the plaintiff is that a security bond was taken by him for the purpose of securing advances made by him to defendant 1 for carrying on business wherein all the defendants were interested, and that all the defendants agreed to hypothecate the immovable properties specified in the schedule to the security bond as security for the said advances. Various defences are raised by the defendants. Defendant 1 admitted the executi...
Ananthachari and ors. Vs. Krishnaswami
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-04-1937
Reported in: AIR1938Mad102
Leach, C.J.1. The appellants are sons of one Gopala Bhattachariar who died in the year 1931. Gopala who was the son of one Manavala lyengar was born after his father's death which took place in 1888. Three years before he died Manavala adopted Srinivasa Bhattachariar, defendant 1 in the suit out of which this appeal arises. Srinivasa died during the pendency of the suit and he is now represented by the respondent. Srinivasa and Gopala remained joint until 1923 when a partition of the family estate was effected. At this time Gopala had one son, appellant 1, then a boy of five years of age. By the dead of partition which was dated 30th March 1923, the family estate was divided equally between Srinivasa and Gopala, notwithstanding that Srinivasa being an adopted son was only entitled in law to a one-fifth share. No question with regard to the validity of the transaction was raised during Gopala's lifetime, but in the month after his death the suit was launched by the widow as the next fri...
The Official Assignee of Madras Representing the Estate of Janaki Amma ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-03-1937
Reported in: AIR1938Mad221; (1938)1MLJ92
Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.1. The plaintiff sued the Official Assignee as representing the estate of one Janaki Ammal to recover the sum of Rs. 738-8-0 with interest which he had paid to him on the 9th September, 1931. He averred that circumstances had arisen since the payment was made which entitled him in law to recover this amount. It is necessary in order to understand the position to go into the early history of this matter.2. In 1900 a piece of immovable property in Madras was purchased in the names of the plaintiff's father (one Duiraiswami) and Janaki for a sum of Rs. 200. The plaintiff's father was the brother of Janaki's husband. Duraiswami having died, the plaintiff instituted in the City Civil Court, Suit No. 437 of 1927, for partition of this property and for recovery of the half share which he said he was entitled to as his father's heir. Janaki defended the suit. She claimed that she was entitled to the whole of the property and alleged that her husband was the purch...
Rm.Al.Rm.Alagappa Chettiar and anr. Vs. Kannappa Chettiar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-03-1937
Reported in: AIR1937Mad962; (1937)2MLJ508
Newsam, J.1. The plaintiffs' suit for a declaration of their title to a house has been decreed. The two defendants appeal.2. The relevant facts may be briefly stated as follows:--In I.P. No. 2 of 1927 on the file of the Rangoon High Court, a firm of Nattukottai Chettiars, of which the father of each defendant was a partner, was adjudicated insolvent. On 17th January, 1928, what is described as a composition scheme was approved by the Court in an order which has been exhibited as D. The terms were as follows:--The Official Assignee was to be paid his expenses and his commission; the creditors agreed to receive and were guaranteed payment of five annas in the rupee by two Chettiar firms, who were described as sureties but who were in reality purchasers of the entire assets of the insolvent firm, In pursuance of this scheme the purchasers of the assets paid Rs. 52,173-9-9 privately to certain creditors and Rs. 55,450 to the Official Assignee for distribution to the remaining creditors. Th...
The Collector of Kistna Vs. Sreemanthu Raja Yarlagadda Sivarama Prasad ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-03-1937
Reported in: AIR1938Mad33; (1937)2MLJ744
Newsam, J.1. The short question arising for decision in all these appeals is what is the proper method of valuing the melwaram interest in land which is being acquired for public purposes. The method adopted by the Land Acquisition Officer in these cases was to deduct the proportionate peishkush from the melwaram revenue and then to multiply the nett income thus found by 20. The learned District Judge was unable to find a better method but thought that the nett income should have been multiplied by 30. Many of the reasons which he gave for adopting the figure 30 in preference to the figure 20 do not at all commend themselves to us.2. These appeals have been filed by Government with the object of restoring the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer. Cross-appeals have also been filed by the Zamindar.3. Now, it seems to us that the principles which should be applied in assessing the capital value of the melwaram interest in land may be thus stated. It is necessary to start with the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »