Chennai Court November 1945 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.
Neelam Suryanarayanamurti Naidu (Minor) and ors. Vs. Boggavarapu Satya ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-05-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Mad264; (1946)1MLJ54
Patanjali Sastri, J.1. These connected appeals arise out 01 an application made by the respondent-creditior under Section 19-A of the Madras Agriculturists Relief Act. He alleged that the debtors, who are five in number, were not agriculturists entitled to the benefits of the Act; but prayed that if for any reason they were found to be agriculturists within the meaning of the Act, the Court should ascertain the sum properly payable under the mortgage executed in his favour.. In support of his case that the debtors were not agriculturists, he filed certain certificates (Exs. P-3 to P-7) granted by the Commissioner, Coconada Municipality, which, he claimed, showed that the respondents who were said to be undivided were assessed during 1935-193 7 to house and land tax in respect of properties whose annual rental value exceeded Rs. 600 so as to bring them within the mischief of proviso (C) to Section 3 (ii) of the Act. The debtors pleaded that they were divided and that if their individual...
S.R.M. Ramanujam Pillai Vs. Ramaswami Pillai and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-02-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Mad181; (1945)2MLJ582
Yahya Ali, J.1. The question involved in this petition is whether certain reliefs in the plaint should be valued for Court-fee purposes under Section 7(iv) A as for cancellation of an instrument. The matter was considered by the lower Court on an objection raised by the Court-fee examiner and it was found that the valuation had to be made under the aforementioned provision and an additional Court-fee should be paid ad valorem on the amount of the mortgages and the value of the properties comprised in the sale deeds, in favour of defendants 5 and 6, mentioned in the plaint.2. The suit is on a mortgage bond executed by the first defendant in plaintiff's favour on the 17th January, 1931, for Rs. 2,000. The first defendant at the time of the execution of the mortgage was the manager of a joint Hindu family consisting of himself and his brothers, defendants 2, 3 and 4. They are the sons of one Muthu Karuppa Pillai, who died shortlybefore the execution of the suit mortgage. During the lifeti...
In Re: the Deccan Commercial Bank, Ltd. (In Liquidation)
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-02-1945
Reported in: (1945)2MLJ573
Clark, J.1. This is an appeal against the order of the Master passed in execution. The applicants are the Official Liquidators of the Deccan Commercial Bank, Ltd. One Khan Sahib Md. Munir Khan Sahib Bahadur was a contributory of this company. He was placed on the list of contributories and an order was obtained against him for payment of the amount due from him in that respect. These execution proceedings are by the Official Liquidators to execute that order. This contributory died in January 1945 at which time he was on the list of contributories and the order for payment had been obtained against him. His son one Md. Nawaz Khan was brought on the record of the execution proceedings as his legal representative. Execution was sought by attachment of certain shares by way of an order prohibiting the Secretary of the Egmore Benefit Fund, Flowers Road, Egmore, Madras, from paying Mohamed Nawaz Khan the amount of shares standing in the name of his deceased father Khan Sahib Md. Munir Khan ...
Komancheri Tarwad Karnavan Chathu Nayar Vs. Vengalil K. Janaki Amma
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-02-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Mad251; (1946)1MLJ8
Chandrasekhara Aiyar, J.1. This is an appeal by the first respondent against the order of the Subordinate Judge of South Malabar at Calicut in an execution petition. The decree was for redemption of a kanom and was passed on 29th June, 1923, in favour of the mexharthdar. It determined also the amounts due to the several defendants as value of improvements and directed that on the plaintiff paying into Court the kanom amount and the value of the improvements, less certain damages payable by the second defendant and future rent until surrender, the defendants should give up possession of the property to the plaintiff. This decree was attached by a creditor of the decree-holder who had obtained a decree against him in O.S. No. 847 of 1932. The decree was sold in auction and was purchased by that decree-holder and the application for execution is by her.2. Execution was resisted by the first respondent (second defendant) on several grounds. Chief among them are (a) that the sale of a decre...
In Re: Kaza Satyanarayana and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-01-1945
Reported in: (1945)2MLJ521
ORDERChandrasekhara Aiyar, J.1. The learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate has misdirected himself on the meaning, scope and effect of Section 6 of the Gaming Act. All that the section says is that ' any card, dice, gaming table or cloth, board or other instruments of gaming found in any place entered or searched under the provisions of Section 5, or on any person found therein shall be evidence that such place is used as a common gaming house, and that the persons found therein were there present for the purpose of gaming, although no play was actually seen by the police officer or any of his assistance.' It is only a piece of evidence in support of the prosecution. He was wrong in thinking that it was a conclusive piece of evidence warranting a finding of guilty without anything more. On the other hand, in this case, the trial Court found on the evidence adduced that the third accused was not using the house for purposes of any profit. These are his words ' The evidence adduced shows that...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›