Chennai Court December 1939 Judgments
A.R. Krishnaswami Aiyar and anr. Vs. the Travancore National Bank, Ltd ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-1939
Reported in: (1940)1MLJ424
Mockett, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendants in a suit filed against them in the City Civil Court by the plaintiffs the Travancore National Bank, Ltd. The cause of action is very simple. It is on a surety bond Ex. I by which the defendants made themselves liable to pay to the plaintiffs the amount due from one K.E. Sodawalla. Under Ex. I it will be seen that Sodawalla had been declared the successful bidder at the auction chit on the 9th February, 1935, and that he was paid a sum of Rs. 3,145. The evidence on behalf of the bank was as given by P.W. 1 that they refused to pay that amount unless, as was their custom, sureties were furnished by the successful bidder of the chic fund. Two such sureties were forthcoming and they are now defendants 1 and 2 in this case. They signed a very formidable document Ex. I from which it will be seen that they made themselves liable in as comprehensive terms as possibly could proceed from the draftsman's pen. The term with which we are immediatel...
Tag this Judgment!A.L.S.P.P.L. Subramaniam Chettiar by Agent Narayanan Aiyar Vs. Annamal ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-06-1939
Reported in: (1940)1MLJ553
Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.1. This petition raises a question with regard to the right to rateable distribution given by Section 73 of the Code of Civil Procedure, but when the authorities are examined it is clear that they negative the petitioner's contention. In 1931 the petitioner obtained a money decree against a grandfather, his son and his son's son. The respondent had previously obtained a money decree against the grandfather and the son, but not against the grandson. In 1931, in separate proceedings, the grandfather and the son were adjudicated insolvents. In 1937 the petitioner filed an application for execution of his decree and asked for the attachment of the grandson's interest in the family property. Attachment was ordered and the grandson's interest was sold on 31st August, 1937. Before the sale took place the respondent filed an application for the execution of his decree, and he also asked for the attachment and sale of the grandson's share in the family property. O...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: K. Srinivasa Rao, First Grade Pleader
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-05-1939
Reported in: (1940)1MLJ259
ORDERAlfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.1. The respondent is a pleader practising in the Coimbatore District. In February, 1937, one G. Thimmappa, a merchant residing and carrying on business in Bellary, presented a petition to this Court in which he charged the respondent with professional misconduct. The Court considered that the charges made called for inquiry and passed an order directing the District judge of Coimbatore to hold the inquiry, the case falling within Section 13 of the Legal Practitioners' Act. When the matter came before the District Judge the petitioner filed a statement in which he said that he was satisfied that the respondent, who had been his pleader for a considerable time, had not acted mala fide; and that his claim had been settled by the respondent, and he wished to withdraw the petition. In the circumstances, the District Judge thought it unnecessary to proceed with the inquiry and. submitted the record to this Court with his remarks. This Court considered that...
Tag this Judgment!S.V.S. Nelliappa Pillai Vs. Sethuramalingam Pillai and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-05-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Mad918; (1940)2MLJ337
Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.1. The appellant financed an appeal filed by one Avudayappa Pillai in a suit which Avudayappa Pillai had instituted to recover a half share in certain immovable properties situated in Tinnevelly which he claimed formed part of the joint family estate. It was held that the properties in suit were the separate properties of Baliah Pillai, the deceased brother of Avudayappa Pillai. The suit was dismissed by the trial Judge, the Subordinate Judge of Tinnevelly, and an appeal was filed to the District Court. During its pendency Avudayappa Pillai died and the appellant in this Letters Patent Appeal applied to be brought on the record in his place under the provisions of Order 22, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. He claimed that he had acquired a half of Avudayappa Pillai's interest in the suit.properties by virtue of a deed dated the 12th of February, 1934. The District Judge allowed the application, but on an appeal to this Court his decision was overru...
Tag this Judgment!Srimath Deivasikamani Ponnambala Desikar Vs. the Board of Commissioner ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-05-1939
Reported in: (1941)2MLJ175
ORDERAlfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.1. The petitioner is the head of an ancient and well-known math, the Tiruvannamalai Math at Kunnakudi. As head of the math he is the trustee of a group of five temples, known as the Anjukovil Devasthanams, Kunnakudi. The Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Board, the respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board') has notified these temples under Chap. VI-A of the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1926, with the object of taking the management of them out of the hands of the petitioner and placing it in the hands of an officer of its own choosing. The petitioner complains that in taking action under Chap.VI-A the Board has not acted bona fide, but in abuse of its powers, and asks the Court in certiorari proceedings to quash the orders of the Board which have resulted in the notification of the temples. A rule nisi has been issued and the Court has now to consider whether the rule should be made absolute.2. From time immemorial the, head of the...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Deivasikamani Ponnambala Desikar Vs. Board of Commissioners for H ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-05-1939
Reported in: AIR1941Mad878
Leach, C.J.1. The petitioner is the head of an ancient and well-known math, the Tiruvannamalai Math at Kunnakudi. As head of the math he is the trustee of a group of five temples, known as the Anjukovil Devasthanams, Kunnakudi. The Madras Hindu Eeligious Endowments Board, the respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board') has notified these temples under Chap. 6-A, Madras Hindu Eeligious Endowments Act, 1926, with the object of taking the management of them out of the hands of the petitioner and placing it in the hands of an officer of its own choosing. The petitioner complains that in taking action under chap. 6-A, the Board has not acted bona fide, but in abuse of its powers, and asks the Court in certiorari proceedings to quash the orders of the Board which have resulted in the notification of the temples. A rule nisi has been issued and the Court has now to consider whether the rule should be made absolute.2. From time immemorial the head of the Tiruvannamalai math has been th...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: S.A. a First Grade Pleader and G. Thimmappa
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-05-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Mad370
Leach, C.J.1. The respondent is a pleader practising in the Coimbatore District. In February 1937 one G. Thimmappa, a mer. chant residing and carrying on business in Bellary, presented a petition to this Court in which he charged the respondent with< professional misconduct. The Court considered that the charges made called for inquiry and passed an order directing the District Judge of Coimbatore to hold the inquiry, the case falling within Section 13, Legal Practitioners' Act. When the matter came before the District Judge the petitioner filed a statement in which he said that he was satisfied that the respondent who had been his pleader for a considerable time, had not acted mala fide; and that his claim had been settled by the respondent, and he wished to withdraw the petition. In the circumstances the District Judge thought it unnecessary to proceed with the inquiry and submitted the record to this Court with his remarks. This Court considered that the District Judge should have p...
Tag this Judgment!S.P.K.N. Subramanian Firm, by Managing Partner S.P.K.N. Subramanian Ch ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-05-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Mad527
Wadsworth, J.1. This appeal raises the question whether a security bond pledging an oil engine installed as part of a cinema can be deemed to be a transaction relating to immovable property so as to attract the provisions of Expl. 1 to Section 3, T.P. Act. The essential facts are the following: Defendant 5 owned a building which he let for a period of three years to defendants 1 and 2 who installed machinery therein and ran it as a cinema. We are now concerned with a 35 horse-power Petter oil engine which was used to work a dynamo to generate electricity for the apparatus and lighting. It is common ground that this engine was installed by making a concrete base fitted with bolts and attaching the engine to the bolts by means of nuts. The lease of defendants 1 and 2 expired in 1930 and there was a suit by defendant 5 for eviction and arrears of rent. Defendant 5 attached before judgment the machinery on the premises. That suit resulted in a compromise decree passed in October 1930 where...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Guruswami Tevar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-04-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Mad196; (1940)1MLJ124
Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.1. In order to appreciate the question which has been referred, it is necessary to state certain of the facts. The appellants have been convicted of murder. The first, second and fourth appellants have been sentenced to death and the third and fifth appellants to transportation for life. Between 5 and 6 o'clock On the morning of the 31st March, 1939, one Nammalwar Naicker was attacked by a band of men and received 38 injuries from which he died shortly after midnight. As the result of his cries three persons who were in the vicinity were attracted to the spot where the deceased was lying. They had not seen the assault, but they said that they had seen rive persons running away. When these witnesses reached the deceased, he told them that he had been attacked by five men and gave their names and the names of their fathers. The names given were the names of the five appellants. One of these witnesses went and called the deceased's brother-in-law and another...
Tag this Judgment!Kona Adinarayana Vs. Dronavalli Venkatasubbayya and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-04-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Mad625; (1940)1MLJ251
Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.1. The appeal arises out of a suit for specific performance of a contract for sale of land tried in the Court of the District Munsif of Gudivada. The respondents were the plaintiffs. On the 4th August, 1930, by a' contract in writing the respondents agreed to sell three-quarters of an acre of land in the Kistna District at the price of Rs. 1,095. The respondents are brothers and are members of an undivided family. The third respondent was a minor at the time the contract was entered into. The contract was signed by the major brothers and by the first respondent as the manager of the family and as the guardian of the minor. The appellant went into possession immediately after the execution of the contract and admittedly he has remained in possession and has enjoyed the rents and profits ever since. The suit for specific performance was filed on the 4th August, 1933. The appellant, although he was in possession and was treating the land as his own, set up t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »