Chennai Court July 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.
Kanuparthi Gangi Reddi Vs. Liquidator of Utukur Co-operative Society ( ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-27-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Mad10
Rajamannar, J.1. This second appeal raises no doubt a question of law depending on the construction of two sections of the Madras Co-operative Societies Act (6 [VI] of 1932), but in my opinion there can be only one answer to the question raised. The appellant before us was a member of the Utukur Co-operative Society which went into liquidation on 4th February 1933. Sometime before the liquidation, on 1st December 1932, plaintiff 1, the appellant herein, ceased to be a member of the society. The liquidator appointed to wind up the society levied contribution against the plaintiffs amongst others on or about 20th January 1940. The plaintiffs appealed to the Registrar of Cooperative Societies against the order for contribution but the Registrar rejected the appeal. There was a revised order for contribution passed against the plaintiffs on 25th November 1940 and the plaintiffs with the leave of the Registrar instituted the suit from which the present appeal arises for a declaration that t...
The Crown Prosecutor Vs. V.R. Ramanatha Aiyar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-26-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Mad44; (1945)2MLJ366
Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.1. This is an appeal by the Provincial Government against the acquittal by the Chief Presidency Magistrate of the respondent on a charge framed under Rule 28-B of the Madras Prevention of Adulteration Rules, 1932, framed under the Prevention of Adulteration Act. The respondent is the Proprietor of a restaurant known as 'The Ramakrishna Lunch Home' in China Bazar Road, Madras. He makes and sells a sweetmeat called jangiri. The ingredients of jangiri are blackgram, rice and sugar. The sweetmeat is generally made by frying the ingredients in ghee. It is said that in some hotels oil is used for this purpose. On the 25th February, 1944, a Food Inspector visited the respondent's restaurant and purchased a quantity of jangiri which was then being offered for sale. He had a sample analysed by the Public Analyst of the Corporation of Madras, who found that the fat used for cooking this particular jangiri consisted of 50 per cent. ghee and 50 per cent, fat not deri...
In Re: Bhupatiraju Ramaraju
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-26-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Mad60; (1945)2MLJ407
ORDERKuppuswami Ayyar, J.1. This is a reference to this Court by the District Magistrate of West Godavari. He has submitted the records in C.C. No. 475 of 1944 on the file of the Sub-Magistrate, Bhimavaram, under Section 341 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for passing the necessary orders thereon. The accused in the case was a born deaf and dumb mute. He was charged under Sections 457 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code for having broken open into a house and having committed theft of two brass vessels and a tiffin carrier. Under Section 341 of the Code of Criminal Procedure if an accused person though not insane, cannot be made to understand the proceedings the Court may proceed with the inquiry or trial and in the case of a Court other than a High Court, if such inquiry results in a commitment, or if such trial results in a conviction, the proceedings shall be forwarded to the High Court with a report of the circumstances of the case and the High Court shall pass thereon such orders a...
Sisili Ammal and ors. Vs. I.S. Sundararaja Naidu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-25-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Mad52; (1945)2MLJ307
1. The question raised in these appeals relates to the nature and effect of the grant under the Original of Ex. D-1.2. Two suits were filed in the Lower Court, O.S. No. 13 of 1942 and O.S. No. 17 of 1942. The judgment under appeal refers to the array of the parties in the later suit and we shall do the same.3. The plaintiffs in O.S. No. 17 of 1942 filed the suit for a declaration that the usufructuary mortgage held by them under Ex. P-1 over the village of Irungattu-kottai is valid and binding on the defendants 1 to 5. The mortgagors are the first defendant, second defendant and Sriramulu Naidu, the father of defendants 3, 4 and 5. The other suit O.S. No. 13 of 1942 was filed by the sons of Sriramulu Naidu against the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 17 of 1942 for an account of their one-third share in the income realised from the suit village on the footing that the document executed by their father Sriramulu and his two brothers is not binding on them. The two suits raise substantially the sa...
Sri Chintalapati Simhadri Raju and anr. Vs. Akella Satyanarayana Pantu ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-24-1945
Reported in: AIR1945Mad487; (1945)2MLJ228
Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.1. This appeal arises out of an interpleader suit filed in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Vizagapatam. The plaintiff is the receiver of the zamindari properties of one Venkata Simhadri Raju, who has throughout the suit been referred to as ' Chinna Babu,' the name by which he was generally known. Chinna Babu, who was a member of a Kshatriya family, died of small-pox at the village of Annamrajupeta in the Vizagapatam district, according to the first defendant at noon of the 12th March, 1934, and according to the second and third defendants on the night of the nth March, 1934. Chinna Babu was possessed of properties worth some 30 lakhs of rupees. The first defendant claimed to be his heir as the adopted son of Chinna Babu's brother, Pedda Babu, who died on the 13th August, 1933. Pedda Babu was survived by his widow, Rajeswaramma, to whom he gave by a will an authority to adopt a son. The first defendant alleges that he was adopted by Rajeswaramma on the...
Velu Sethurayar and anr. Vs. Karuppayammal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-24-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Mad159; (1945)2MLJ442
Somayya, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the plaintiffs who are the sisters' sons of the last owner for a declaration that the alienations made by one or other of the three widows of the last male holder are not valid and binding on them, after the death of the widows. The suit is resisted by the alienees mainly on the ground that the plaintiffs are not the nearest reversioners but that the 22nd defendant is the nearer reversioner, he being alleged to be the deceased's brother's son. If the 22nd defendant is the son of a deceased brother of the last male holder, it is undoubted that in law he succeeds in preference to the sisters' sons. The 22nd defendant also claims that he was the nearer reversioner and that the alienations were not binding upon him. On these pleadings an issue was joined whether the plaintiffs are the nearest reversioners which involves the question of fact whether the 22nd defendant is the brother's son of the deceased. After an elaborate trial, the lower Court fou...
Jaina Muhammad Sheriff Maracair Alias Jackiria Muhammad Sheriff Maraca ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-23-1945
Reported in: (1945)2MLJ318
Somayya, J.1. These three appeals arise out of O.S. No. 1 of 1941 on the file of the District Court of East Tanjore. The suit was filed by the appellant in A.S. No. 257 of 1943 for various reliefs regarding the properties in suit. The first defendant is the Official Assignee of Madras who is acting as an auxiliary of the Official Assignee of Singapore in the insolvency of the second defendant K. Muhammad Hussain. Muhammad Hussain was adjudged a bankrupt by the Singapore Court by an order passed in January, 1931. At the instance of the Official Assignee of Singapore m whom the estate of the second defendant vested, the Official Assignee of Madras has been acting in aid of and as the auxiliary of the Singapore Official Assignee. This is by an order of the High Court of Madras passed in its insolvency jurisdiction.2. One Zacharia Hussain of Velanganni in the Tanjore district started a business in Singapore in boats, lighters, etc., in 1884, and built up a lucrative business. He took his w...
K. Appa Rao Vs. Gopal Doss and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-23-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Mad42; (1945)2MLJ363
Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.1. The question in this appeal is whether the second defendant was authorised to sell a house owned by the first defendant. The plaintiff, who is the appellant, sued on the original side of this Court for damages for the breach of a contract to sell to him a house. He says that the first defendant gave full authority to the second defendant to sell the house on his behalf and that the second defendant entered into a contract with him within the scope of this authority. The first defendant refused to honour the contract, and sold the property to a third party for the sum of Rs. 32,000. The suit was for recovery of damages in the sum of Rs. 5,000 being the difference between the price at which the plaintiff agreed to buy the property and its true value, as shown by the sale to the third party. The plaintiff asked for a decree against both the defendants for a sum of Rs. 5,114. It is now admitted that the figure should only be Rs. 5,000. The learned trial Ju...
Jaina Muhammad Sheriff Maracair and ors. Vs. Official Assignee of Madr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-23-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Mad25
Somayya, J.1. These three appeals arise out of O.S. No. 1 of 1941 on the file of the District Court of East Tanjore. The suit was tiled by the appellant in A.S. No. 257 of 1943 for various reliefs regarding the properties in suit. Defendant 1 is the Official Assignee of Madras who is acting as an auxiliary of the Official Assignee of Singapore in the insolvency of defendant 2, K. Mohamed Hussain. Mohamed Hussain was adjudged a bankrupt by the Singapore Court by an order passed in January 1931. At the instance of the Official Assignee of Singapore in whom the estate of defendant 2 vested, the Official Assignee of Madras has been acting in aid of and as the auxiliary of the Singapore Official Assignee. This is by an order of the High Court of Madras passed in its insolvency jurisdiction.2. One Zacharia Hussain of Velanganni in the Tanjore district started a business in Singapore in boats, lighters etc., in 1884 and built up a lucrative business. He took his wife's brother defendant 2, Mo...
A.L.V.R.S.T. Veerappa Chettiar and anr. Vs. Thangachami Naicker and or ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-19-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Mad5; (1945)2MLJ264
1. The question arising for decision in this appeal is whether the trusteeship of the suit choultry founded for feeding wayfarers goes with the ownership of the impartible estate and passes even to a stranger when he becomes the transferee of the estate. The suit choultry is situate at Teni, midway between the headquarters of the Thevaram Zamindari, which is an impartible estate in Madura district, and Madura, the headquarters of the district. The choultry was founded between 1875 and 1877 by Konda Bommu Naicker, the then Zamindar of the Thevaram Zamin. For the upkeep and conduct of the charity Konda Bommu Naicker endowed certain lands, shops and buildings situate in several villages. The village of Teni where the choultry is situate is outside the Thevaram Zamindari. The appellants' case is that the founder intended the choultry to be annexed to the Zamindari itself and that whosoever is the Zamindar for the time being of the Thevaram Zamin is to be the trustee and manager of the chou...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »