Chennai Court October 1944 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.
Parambath Chattankandy Alias Ponnambalath Parapravan Mammu Haji Vs. Ni ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-06-1944
Reported in: AIR1945Mad170; (1945)1MLJ1
1. The plaintiff who has failed in both the lower Courts in his attempt to set aside a lease granted by the preceding karnavan is the appellant before me. The tarwad possesses among other properties an extensive forest in the Western Ghats which was hot explored till the respondent appeared on the scene and offered to take a felling contract of the trees in that forest. There were three documents which were executed in favour of the defendant in succession, Exs. D-3, D-2 and D-1. Ex. D-3 was executed on the 15th March, 1941, for a, period of three years. On the 30th June; 1941, about 3,1 months later owing to certain difficulties which are mentioned in Ex. D-2, a fresh document was executed for a period of three years. After the defendant worked in the forest for sometime and when further difficulties were found, the suit document was executed on 5th March, 1942, for a period of ten years (Ex. D-1). The plaint was filed on the 1st April, 1942, within a month after Ex. D-1 for a declara...
Mahmood H.Y. Vs. the Kerala Corporation Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-04-1944
Reported in: AIR1945Mad181; (1945)1MLJ44
Chandrasekhara Aiyar, J.1. This is a simple case where the landlord seeks to recover from the tenant possession of certain premises taken on lease on 1st January, 1943, for one year on a monthly rent of Rs. 300 for the first three months and Rs. 320 for the remaining period. The plaintiff states that the defendants are in arrears of rent for the months of October, November, and December, 1943, amounting to Rs. 662-6-7. He also seeks to recover mesne profits at Rs. 320 a month from the date of the termination of the tenancy, viz., is January, 1944, upto the date of delivery of possession.2. The defences raised are that even after 1st January, 1944, the defendants continued in possession of the ground floor of the premises on a monthly rent of Rs. 100 and that they are liable to pay rent only at this rate and further they that are entitled under the Madras Rent Control Order, 1941, to, continue in occupation till 1st March, 1945. Two subsidiary questions have also been raised, namely, th...
Sri Kothandaramaswami Temple at Adambar Represented by Its Trustees S. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-04-1944
Reported in: (1945)1MLJ63
1. By a will dated the 6th June, 1895, one Ponnammal directed that out of the income of certain immovable properties belonging to her the cost of performing religious services in temples specified by her should be met. One of the temples is the Sri Kothandaramaswami Temple at Adambar in the Tanjore district, of which the appellants are the trustees. In 1941 they instituted a suit in the Court of the District Munsiff of Mayavaram against the first and the second respondents, the successors in interest of one Subbaraya Aiyar who became possessed of the properties subject to the charges created by the testatrix. There were other defendants but it is not necessary to state why they were joined as parties. The first and second respondents strenuously defended the action. In the first place they denied that a valid charge had been created by the testatrix in favour of the Sri Kothandaramaswami temple and they averred that the suit was not ' maintainable by reason of the provisions of Section...
Sri Kothandaramaswami Temple at Adambar Represented by Trustees, S. Va ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-04-1944
Reported in: AIR1945Mad101
Leach, C.J. 1. By a will dated 6th June 1895 one Ponnammal directed that out of the income of certain immovable properties belonging to her the cost of performing religious Services in temples specified by her should be met. One of the temples is the Sri Kothandaramaswami Temple at Adambar in the Tanjore district, of which the appellants are the trustees. In 1941 they instituted a suit in the Court of the District Munsif of Mayavaram against respondents 1 and 2, the successors in interest of one Subbaraya Ayyar who became possessed of the properties subject to the charges created by the testatrix. There were other defendants but it is not necessary to state why they were joined as parties. Respondents 1 and 2 strenuously defended the action. In the first place they denied that a valid charge had been created by the testatrix in favour of the Sri Kothandaramaswami temple and they averred that the suit was not maintainable by reason of the provisions of Sections 44 and 73, Madras Hindu R...
Sokkammal Vs. Arunachalam Pillai and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-03-1944
Reported in: (1945)2MLJ460
Byers, J.1. The plaintiff attained majority in 1939 and, after securing from the Court an assignment of the security bond which was taken from his guardian appointed by the Court, he has brought a suit for accounts and for the recovery of sums found to have been misapplied or misappropriated.2. Mr. A. Swaminatha Aiyar rightly points out that as accounts have already been furnished to the District Court by his guardian and examined by auditors he cannot now sue for accounts but can sue only on the accounts already furnished for the recovery of what is payable after surcharging and falsifying. He valued his plaint at the notional figure of Rs. 200 and paid court-fee accordingly. In several paragraphs of his plaint he gave details of amounts misapplied and misappropriated, and these sums amount approximately to Rs. 5,800.3. If his suit is for accounts he need not specify the amount he expects to receive; it is sufficient to pay court-fees on the relief of accounting and to pay court-fees ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›