Chennai Court September 1938 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.
M. Appadorai Aiyangar (Deceased) and ors. Vs. P.B. Annangarachariar an ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-13-1938
Reported in: AIR1939Mad102; (1939)1MLJ124
Wadsworth, J.1. This appeal arises out of the interminable and deplorable disputes between the Thengalai and Vadagalai sects of Vaishnava Brahmins worshipping in the Sri Varadarajaswami Temple at Conjeevaram. The disputes have a history going-back for at least two centuries. Fortunately, we can start with the decision of this Court in Tatacharyar v. Krishnamacharyar I.L.R.(1882) 5 Mad. 313 where the learned Judges set forth the ancient history of this dispute, described the Adyapakam service to which it relates and decided the main basis upon which this service shall be conducted. The learned judges pointed out that the service consisted originally of the Thodakkam or the invocation to prayer, followed by the Mantram in praise of the Guru, after which comes the main part of the service consisting of the recitation of the Prabandams in the Tamil language. The learned Judges observed that the Thodakkam office had been by consent entrusted to a particular family of Vadagalais, that no one...
Dubash D.K. Ahmad Ibrahim Sahib Vs. A.K.R.M.K. Meyyappa Chettiar and o ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-13-1938
Reported in: AIR1940Mad285
Varadachariar, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for the recovery of money due under a mortgage bond (Ex. A) executed in favour of the plaintiff by defendants 1 to 3 on 14th May 1923. Defendants 1 to 3 are the sons of one Khan Bahadur Dubash Khadir who died in November 1912. Defendant 4 was unnecessarily impleaded and his name was subsequently removed from the record. Defendant 5 is the Official Assignee of Rangoon in whom the estate of defendants 1 and 2 had vested during the pendency of the suit when they became insolvents in 1929. The mortgagees are certain Chettiars to each of whom defendants 1 and 2 had become indebted in the course of their business at Eangoon. It was stated that there was some inconvenience in executing separate mortgages in favour of each of them and that they accordingly agreed to take a single mortgage bond in their joint names for the aggregate amount due to them and for the cash advanced on the date of Ex. A. The document proceeds on the footing that de...
In Re: Advocate
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-12-1938
Reported in: (1939)1MLJ564
Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.1. The respondent who is an Advocate of this Court was charged with professional misconduct on a complaint by one Palaniswami Chetty, who is now dead. There were three separate charges. The first charge was that the respondent was engaged in or about July, 1934, by the complainant to file an appeal in this Court and put in sufficient funds for filing it, but that he presented the memorandum of appeal with a court-fee stamp of only Rs. 50 whereas it should have been stamped with court-fee of Rs. 142. The second charge was that having filed the appeal with a deficient court-fee the respondent made the complainant believe that the full court-fee had been paid. The third charge was that when the memorandum of appeal was returned by this Court for re-presentation with the proper court-fee the respondent did not re-present it in time, as he ought to have done. The Bar Council Tribunal heard the evidence on behalf of the complainant and the respondent and has pr...
Tallapragada Achutharamayya Vs. Ayyagari Soorappayya and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-09-1938
Reported in: AIR1939Mad61; (1938)2MLJ894
Wadsworth, J.1. These appeals arise out of a decision of the survey officer wider the Madras Survey and Boundaries Act. Second Appeal No. 537 relates to a suit in which the appellant was the plaintiff and sued for possession on the basis of a favourable decision of the survey officers; whereas S.A. No. 538 relates to O.S. No. 154 in which the respondent who was an unsuccessful claimant before the survey officer sued to set aside the survey officer's decision. The decision of the survey officer in appeal is contained in Ex. F, dated 31st October, 1924. According to the appellant the relevant survey notification is Ex. S, dated 22nd November, 1926. But the learned Subordinate Judge has accepted the respondent's contention that limitation began to run only from a subsequent survey notification, Ex. X, dated 21st April, 1931. If this contention is wrong, the respondent's suit O.S. No. 154 is clearly time barred with reference to the terms of Section 14 of the Madras Survey and Boundaries A...
In Re: Maddukuri Subba Rao and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-09-1938
Reported in: AIR1940Mad55; (1939)2MLJ750
ORDERLakshmana Rao, J.1. The evidence justifies the conviction of the petitioners under Section 426, Penal Code, and the fines are not excessive. But the offence under Section 426, Penal Code, does not involve a breach of the peace and the order under Section 106, Criminal P.C., cannot be sustained. The order under Section 106, Criminal P.C., is therefore set aside and otherwise this petition is dismissed....
The Asiatic Government Society Life Assurance Company, Limited Vs. the ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-08-1938
Reported in: AIR1939Mad555; (1939)1MLJ635
Mockett, J.1. The plaintiffs, the Asiatic Government Security Life Assurance Co., Ltd., sue the defendants, the New Asiatic Life Insurance Co., Ltd., claiming an injunction restraining the defendants from carrying on business, etc., under the name of 'The New Asiatic Life Assurance Co., Ltd.,' or any other name which includes the word 'Asiatic' which is likely to deceive or mislead the public into the belief that the defendant's company is the same as the plaintiff's company. In para. 3 of the plaint the plaintiffs allege that their name, and particularly the word 'Asiatic' had come to be associated with the plaintiffs'' company in the minds of the public. I emphasise 'the public' In para. 4 they allege that the defendants' name substantially is the same as that of the plaintiffs' company and is a colourable imitation of the plaintiffs' company's name. In para. 5 plaintiffs allege that the defendants must have known of the plaintiffs' company's existence and designation and that the ac...
The Secretary of State for India in Council, Represented by the Collec ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-08-1938
Reported in: AIR1939Mad95; (1938)2MLJ904
Varadachariar, J.1. This is an application made on behalf of the Secretary of State for India in Council, for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council against the decision of this Court in A.S. No. 179 of 1937. That judgment did not decide the rights of the parties finally but only remanded the suit for trial on the merits. In the Court below, an objection had been taken to the jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the suit on the ground that the suit was barred by the provisions of the Sea Customs Act (vide issue 3). The lower Court tried this issue as a preliminary issue and upholding the objection dismissed the suit. On appeal by the plaintiff, this Court held that the Civil Court was not deprived of jurisdiction in the matter by the provisions of the Sea Customs Act and accordingly directed the case to be tried on the merits.2. It has been held that an order of the above kind is not a 'final order' within the meaning of Clauses (a) and (b) of Section 109, Civil Procedure Code. Th...
V. Panchapakesa Aiyar Vs. the Secretary of State for India in Council ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-06-1938
Reported in: AIR1939Mad17; (1938)2MLJ745
Wodsworth, J.1. This case arises out of a suit by the appellant for return of the deposit of Rs. 250 made with the Collector by the plaintiff as a condition precedent to his candidature for a seat in the Legislative Council as one of the representatives of the Tanjore District. The result of the election was that the plaintiff got 1,618 votes while the total number of votes polled was 13,373, of which 12,917 were found to be valid votes. Thus the plaintiff got less than one-eighth of the total number of votes polled but more than one-eighth of the total number of valid votes. On these figures the Collector declared the deposit of the plaintiff to be forfeited under Rule 12, sub-Rules. 3 and 4 of the Madras Electoral Rules framed under the Government of India Act, Section 72(a) (4) which empowers the making of provision by rules under the Act for certain purposes, among them beingthe qualification of electors, the constitution of constituencies and the method of election of the Governor...
Ct. Al. Vr. Alagappa Chettiar and anr. Vs. the Bank of Chettinad, Ltd. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-06-1938
Reported in: AIR1939Mad6; (1938)2MLJ944
Varadachariar, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for the recovery of money due under a promissory note (Ex. J), executed by the first defendant in favour of the plaintiff on 4th May, 1932. The first defendant is the eldest son of one CT. AL. VR. Veerappa Chettiar who died in October, 1927. The fifth and sixth defendants are the minor sons of the first defendant; the second defendant is the younger brother of the first defendant and the seventh defendant is the minor son of the second defendant. Defendants 3 and 4 are the stepbrothers of defendants 1 and 2. The plaint asked for a personal decree against defendants 1, 2 and 3 and for a decree against all the defendants to the extent of the family assets in their hands. The learned Subordinate Judge dismissed the suit as against defendants 3 and 4 and gave the plaintiff a personal decree as against defendants 1 and 2 and a decree against the family assets in the hands of defendants 1, 2 and 5 to 7. Against this decree this appeal has ...
In Re: Uppara Dodda Narasa
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-05-1938
Reported in: AIR1939Mad59; (1938)2MLJ771
Burn, J.1. The appellant has been convicted of murder by the learned Sessions Judge of Bellary and has been sentenced to death. He has also been convicted of wilfully preferring a false complaint (Section. 211 of the Indian Penal Code) and for that offence he has been sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment.2. This is the first time in our experience that a person has been tried atone trial for offences under Sections 302 and 211 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution theory was that on the night of the 8th December, 1937, the appellant killed one Chaji Eranna, a farm labourer with the intention of foisting a false case of murder upon his enemies P.W. 11 and others. The appellant preferred the complaint Ex. A to the Village Munsiff at about 8-30P.M. on the 8th December, 1937, in which he mentioned the names of P.W. 11 and nine others. He alleged that these persons armed with a battle-axe and stout sticks had come and attacked himself and his younger brother and Eranna while ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »