Chennai Court April 1945 Judgments
Makineni Virayya and ors. Vs. Madamanchi Bapayya
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-27-1945
Reported in: AIR1945Mad492; (1945)2MLJ208
Patanjali Sastri, J.1. The only question raised in this second appeal is whether the plaintiff-respondent is precluded by his individual conduct from claiming the properties in suit as the nearest reversionary heir of his maternal grandfather, one Makineni Buchayya, who was the last full owner. Both the Courts below have held that he is not and passed a decree for delivery of possession. The defendants 1 to 3, 5 and 6 have preferred this appeal challenging the correctness of that decision.2. The following table will show the relationship of the parties one to another : Buchayya : Lakshmi Devi (d. 1900) (d. 21-5-1930) | __________________________________ | | Mangamma (predeceased Buchayya) Subbamma (d. 1906) | | Venkatasubbamma (d. 1906) Bapayya (Plaintiff) | Veerayya (first defendant)3. On the 4th January, 1904, Lakshmi Devi executed a dakhal deed (Ex. D-1) whereby she transferred the properties inherited by her from her husband Buchayya. The deed recites that her husband, while in a ...
Tag this Judgment!S.S. Narayanaswami Aiyar Vs. Alamelu Ammal and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-27-1945
Reported in: AIR1945Mad507; (1945)2MLJ217
Somayya, J.1. The plaintiff appeals against the decree of the lower appellate Court dismissing his suit for a declaration that he is absolutely entitled to a certain fund over which the first respondent levied attachment in execution of a money decree obtained against the assets of the second respondent's father. The amount in question is about Rs. 1,437 which stood to the credit of Ramakrishna. Ayyar, the .second respondent's father, in the hands of a society known as the Bombay Postal Co-operative Society Limited. The deceased Ramakrishna Iyer was a member of this society. He borrowed certain monies and transferred by way of security two postal life insurance policies. After adjusting the amounts due to the Bombay Co-operative Society there was a sum of Rs. 1,437-11-0 to the credit of Ramakrishna Iyer. The husband of the first respondent obtained a decree against Ramakrishna Iyer in 1932 and levied attachment of the amount in question after the death of Ramakrishna Ayyar which took p...
Tag this Judgment!Pavayammal and anr. Vs. the District Board
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-27-1945
Reported in: (1947)1MLJ62
ORDERHappell, J.1. The Salem District Board was entrusted with the management of a choultry and the property with which the choultry was endowed. On the ground that the petitioners had unauthorisedly occupied a portion of the property attached to the choultry, the District Board served them with a notice to vacate and then prosecuted them under Section 164(2) read with Section 207(1) of the Madras Local Boards Act on the ground that they had failed to vacate the land in contravention of the notice served on them. The petitioners were convicted on 11th March, 1944, but still did not vacate the property and some six months later, on 2nd September, 1944, the District Board prosecuted them under Section 207, Sub-section (2) of the Act. It appears that there is a civil suit pending between the District Board and the petitioners in regard to the title to the property in question but this suit was filed after the conviction in the first case, and an undertaking which the Board seems to have g...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Marudai Pillai P.C. 232 and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-26-1945
Reported in: AIR1945Mad458; (1945)2MLJ125
ORDERKuppuswami Ayyar, J.1. One Sellamuthu happened to be sent to the Head Quarters Hospital at Trichinopoly in connection with certain injuries found on his person and on information given by him to the District Medical Officer, the Medical Officer thought that the injuries had been caused to him by the police personnel of Turaiyur. as he was of the opinion that the injuries were serious ones likely to result in death, He sent up the papers to the District Magistrate stating that certain allegations had been made against the police personnel of Turaiyur and that it was desirable that there should be an inquiry and steps taken to see that the culprits were punished, if they had really committed any offence. The District Magistrate on receipt of the papers sent them on to the Sub-Divisional Magsitrate of Trichinopoly who was also in additional charge of the Musiri sub-division within which division the offence, if any, had been committed, to make inquiries and report. The papers evident...
Tag this Judgment!Angammal Vs. V.K.M. Muhammad Sulaiman Lebbai and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-26-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Mad38; (1945)2MLJ239
Somayya, J.1. A preliminary decree for redemption of a usufructuary mortgage was passed on the 15th October, 1935, and the time fixed for payment was 15th January, 1936. The plaintiff did not deposit the amount on or before that date and did not ask for extension of the time under Order 34, Rule 7(2). She deposited the amount towards the end of 1942 and filed I. A No. 93 of 1943 on the 2nd February, 1943, under Order 34, Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure asking the Court to pass a final decree with a direction to the'defendant to deliver the mortgaged property to her. The trial Court dismissed the petition and on appeal the Subordinate Judge confirmed the decree of the trial Court and hence this second appeal.2. The appellant urges that her case is covered by the terms of Order 34, Rule 8 and that it enables her to pay into Court the amounts due from her as fixed under Rule 7(1) of Order 34, at arty time before a final decree debarring the plaintiff frpift all right to redeefn the ...
Tag this Judgment!The Public Prosecutor Vs. Venkadari Naga Pulliah Chetti
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-26-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Mad414; (1946)1MLJ461
Happell, J.1. This is an appeal by the Provincial Government against the acquittal of the accused in C.C. No. 553 of 1944 in the Court of the Stationary Sub-Magistrate of Nandyal. The accused is a shop-keeper and he had in his shop some tins labelled ' Sri Sai Coffee Tablets,' ' Pure Coffee 50 per cent and roasted Coffee husk 50 per cent.' He sold some of these tablets to the Sanitary Inspector of the Nandyal Municipality on the 13th May, 1944 and, on analysis, they were found to contain not 50 per cent, of coffee and 50 per cent, of roasted coffee husk but 15 per cent, of coffee and 85 per cent, of some other substance referred to as imitation coffee which contained no coffee husk. On the footing of this analysis he was prosecuted for an offence punishable under Section 5(1)(a) and (d) of the Madras Prevention of Adulteration Act, 1918, read with Rules 36 (b) and 40 framed under the Act. On receiving a notice of the summons the accused sent to the local executive officer a copy of the...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Gazula Anandappa
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-25-1945
Reported in: AIR1945Mad423; (1945)2MLJ131
ORDERAlfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.1. The application before the Court is for an order directing an appeal which lies to the District Court of Anantapur to be received by this Court and transmitted to the District Court on its reopening after the summer vacation, the object being to obtain an interim order from this Court. The application is in accordance with a practice which existed in this Court from the year 1933 until last year. The practice was based on an unreported judgment of Ramesam, J. (C.M. Ps. Nos. 2774 and 2840 of 1933). In an order dated the 9th June, 1944, also unreported (C.M.P. No. 2513 of 1944) Byers, J., disagreed with the judgment of Ramesam, J., and held that an appeal which lay to a Court subordinate to this Court could not be received by this Court on the ground that the proper Court was closed for the vacation. The present application has been placed before this Bench in order that the conflict may be decided.2. Section 13 of the Madars Civil Courts Act, 1873,...
Tag this Judgment!Musali Ammal Vs. K.E. Chellaperumal Mudaliar and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-25-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Mad145; (1945)2MLJ305
Somayya, J.1. The suit out of which this second appeal arises was filed by the plaintiffs-respondents for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 800 said to be due on a mortgage, Ex. P-l, dated the 19th June, 1927. This was executed by the first defendant and by the father of defendants 2 to 5. There was an earlier mortgage of the suit property effected by the mortgagors in favour of one Muniswami Muda-liar. That mortgagee's assignee filed O.S. No. 261 of 1931, obtained a decree and brought the properties to sale in execution of that mortgage decree. One Muniswami Naicker became the purchaser. Before the sale was confirmed, items 1 and 2 covered by the suit mortgage which are Survey Nos. 80 and 81 were sold to the vendor of the sixth defendant who is the appellant in this second appeal and with the money raised under that sale deed the mortgagors made a deposit under O. 21, Rule 89 of the Civil Procedure Code and got the sale set aside. The sixth defendant subsequently purchased the property fro...
Tag this Judgment!Ahmed Batcha Sahib and ors. Vs. Mohamed Haneef Sahib
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-24-1945
Reported in: (1945)2MLJ158
Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.1. The question in this appeal is whether Section 146 of the Madras Estates Land Act, 1908, which was repealed by the Madras Estates Land (Amendment) Act, 1934, applied to a case where a holding had vested in the Official Assignee of Madras on the insolvency of the ryot.2. On the 3rd August, 1931, the estate of one Abdul Karim was ordered by this Court to be administered in insolvency. The proceedings had been instituted by a creditor during the lifetime of Abdul Karim, but he died before the order of adjudication was passed. On 2nd June, 1933, the landholder took action under Section 112 of the Madras Estates Land Act for arrears of rent and as a result the property was sold to one Abdul Subhan. Notice of these proceedings was not given to the Official Assignee. On 17th November 1934, Abdul Subhan sold the holding to one Rahima Bi, who is now dead and whose heirs are the plaintiffs. On 31st December, 1934, Moosa Miyan, the eldest son of the insolvent, so...
Tag this Judgment!Gudementla China Appalaraja Vs. Kota Venkatasubba Rao
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-24-1945
Reported in: (1946)1MLJ66
Shahabuddin, J.1. The petitioner was the defendant in O.S. No. 146 of 1942, filed by the respondent in the Court of the District Munsiff of Cocanada. The case of the respondent was that the petitioner who is his brother-in-law, agreed to lend him Rs. 525 on security of his lands in Yanam which is in French territory. Under the French Law, the immoveable properties in French territory can be made liable only under a decree obtained in French Courts. The petitioner and respondent therefore proceeded to Yanam and obtained a consent decree from the Sub-Court of Yanam to the effect that the respondent owed the petitioner a sum of Rs. 525 and agreed to pay the same with interest at 8 per cent, per annum within a period of two years. But as a matter of fact the petitioner had by that time paid the respondent only Rs. 100 and though he promised to pay the entire balance in Cocanada, he paid him only Rs. 25. The respondent therefore claimed the balance with interest mainly as damages for breach...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »