Chennai Court October 1939 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.
In Re: Perianna Pillai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-04-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Mad183
ORDERLakshmana Rao, J.1. The order or the Village Headman under Section 10 of Regulation 11 of 1816 was not subject to appeal or revision except under Section 107, Government of India Act of 1915, and Clause (2) of Section 224, Government of India Act of 1935 excludes the jurisdiction of the High Court in such cases. The revision petition is therefore dismissed....
Manickavasaka thevar and anr. Vs. Chidambaram Pillai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-03-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Mad185; (1940)1MLJ20
Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit filed by the respondent in the Court of the District Munsif of Tenkasi for a decree setting aside a sale held under the Madras Estates Land Act, 1908, and for a declaration of his title. The land in suit formed part of a mitta of which the second appellant is the mittadar. The ryot was one Namasivaya Moopanar who became insolvent in 1926. His insolvency, however, did not result in the disturbance of his possession. The Official Receiver took no steps to take over the land, nor even to notify the landlord of the ryot's insolvency. Before the insolvency the ryot had mortgaged the holding to the respondent, who brought a suit to enforce his mortgage and impleaded the Official Receiver as a defendant. A mortgage decree was obtained and on the 18th October, 1929, the property was sold in execution, the respondent being the auction-purchaser. He took possession of the property from the ryot on the 19th December, 1929. In 1932...
Ramaswami Konar Vs. Nachiar Ammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-03-1939
Reported in: (1940)2MLJ491
ORDERLakshmana Rao, J.1. The complaint of defamation is founded on allegations in a petition and sworn statement to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and the allegations are stated to be false. The offence committed would therefore fall under Section 182 or Section 193 of the Indian Penal Code and as held In re Appadurai Nainar : (1935)69MLJ812 , parties cannot be allowed to eyade the provisions of Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by filing a complaint under another provision of law. The revision petition is therefore allowed and the proceedings are quashed....
Karinagisetti Chennappa Vs. Karinagisetti Onkarappa
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-02-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Mad33; (1939)2MLJ884
Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, J.1. This appeal raises the question whether the paternal grandmother of a Hindu minor is his lawful guardian when she happens to be his nearest living relation. From 1917 to 1924 the respondent's father had on various occasions borrowed money from the appellant. On the 18th September, 1924, an account was taken and it was found that the respondent's father owed the appellant an aggregate sum of Rs. 3,825 for which he executed a promissory note. The instrument was not properly stamped and therefore was not admissible in evidence. Realizing the defect the appellant filed a suit in the Court of the District Munsif of Bellary for relief on the basis of a settled account. The date of the institution of the suit was 16th July, 1932, and unless the appellant was entitled to rely on certain endorsements on the promissory notes his suit was time barred. I should mention that the respondent's father had died on the 4th October, 1924, and the suit was against the respo...
Prerepa Bhagavat Sastrulu (Died) and anr. Vs. Saridey Lakshmikantam
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-02-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Mad511; (1940)1MLJ60
Wadsworth, J.1. This appeal raises a question regarding the right of the permanently kept concubine of a deceased Hindu to claim maintenance when she has not had a child by the deceased. It is a question upon which authority is meagre. The only definite pronouncement is contained in an obiter dictum of Spencer, J., at page 810 in the case of Rama Raja Thevar v. Papammal : AIR1925Mad1230 . The learned Judge was dealing with a case of a claim by a concubine who in fact had a daughter by her deceased paramour. In laying down the conditions upon which a concubine may be entitled to maintenance he observes:Another condition that has been put on the right of a concubine to be maintained is that she should be the mother of illegitimate children,2. quoting as authorities the case of Khemkor v. Umiashankar (1873) 10 B.H.C.R. 381 and Strange's Hindu Law, Chapter 8, p. 174. The other learned Judge while agreeing generally with the conclusion of Spencer, J., says nothing about the question whether...
Varada Bhaktavatsaludu and anr. Vs. Damojipurapu Venkatanarasimha Rao ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-02-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Mad530; (1940)1MLJ195
Venkataramana Rao, J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Ellore dismissing the plaintiff's suit on the ground that it was barred by limitation. The relevant facts may be shortly stated. The plaintiffs and the fourth defendant are the sons of one Varada Venkataramanayya. During his lifetime Varada Venkataramanayya as manager of his family entered into a partnership with defendants 1 to 3 for the carrying on of a mill business known as Gopalakrishna Rice Mill. He died on the 12th November, 1927, without adjusting his accounts with the partnership. This suit has been laid by the plaintiffs who were admittedly minors on the 29th October, 1931, for a declaration that the partnership which their father carried on with defendants 1 to 3 must be deemed to have been dissolved on the 12th November, 1927, and for taking an account of the partnership and for payment of such sums as maybe found due and payable appertaining to their father's share. T...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›