Chennai Court April 1950 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.
In Re: Venkayalapati Kotaiah of Narasaraopet
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-18-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad350; (1950)2MLJ264
Subba Rao J.1. The Sessions Judge of Guntur convicted the accused under Section 302, Penal Code, and sentenced him to transportation for life. The corpse of Sayammal, the wife of the accused, was found at 12 noon on 1-6-1949 on a cot in the shed belonging to the accused, There were as many as ten injuries on the neck and hand of the deceased. The doctor who conducted the autopsy issued a post mortem certificate which disclosed that the deceased died of shock and haemorrhage due to the multiple injuries inflicted on the deceased with an axe like M. O. 1. As P. W. 1 he opined that death must have been caused five hours before the commencement of the post mortem examination which he did at 4-45 P. M. that is, according to his view the deceased must have died at or about 12 noon.2. There is some evidence in this case which establishes a powerful motive for the offence. P. W. 10 is residing in a house beyond two houses of the accused. A few days prior to the incident, at midnight, she saw o...
Rajala Hanumanthappa Vs. Mundluru Gangappa
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad256; (1950)IIMLJ284
ORDERPanchapakesa Ayyar,J.1. This petition raises an interesting point of law, viz., whether in an appeal admitting of the appearance of both a senior and a junior practitioner, and the payment of fees to both, the senior practitioner should be on record in the appeal from the date fixed for the appearance of the respondent in the appeal before his fee can be claimed, as held by the learned District Judge of Anantapur. 2. The facts were briefly these. A. S. No. 139 of 1947 was valued at Rs. 5,000, and, of course, admitted, under the Rules, of a senior and a junior practitioner appearing. The junior, Mr. T. Kodanda Rama Rao, was admittedly on record from the date fixed for the appearance of the petitioner, respondent 1. But, as is usually the case, when the stage for final hearing (and arguments) came, on 3-4-1948, he indented on a senior, Mr. P. M. Srinivasa Aiyangar, who admittedly appeared and argued the appeal. Ultimately, the learned District Judge had to consider whether Mr. Srini...
S.N.T. Kumaraswami Chettiar and ors. Vs. M.S.M. Chinnathambi Chettiar ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-14-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad291; (1950)2MLJ453
Rajamannar, C.J.1. This second appeal has been posted before a Bench, because Govinda Menon J. considered that the points raised in it are of sufficient importance to be heard by a Bench.2. The facts which led up to the suit filed by the appellants are stated clearly and fully in the judgment of the District Munsif, Tiruchirapalli, who disposed of the case in the first instance. It is sufficient to mention only the material facts necessary for a discussion of the points of law which arise in this appeal. There were two partnership businesses carried on under the name and style of Sri Krishna & Co., (Boiler) and Krishna & Co. (Bice Mill). The former was started on 25-6.1923 with 60 persons owning the business in 40 shares with a share capital of Rs. 600 per share. The latter was started on 6-9-1923 and consisted of 37 persons owning 20 shares with a share capital of Rs. 600 per share. Some of the persons had shares in both the partnerships. There were changes in the partners from time t...
In Re: Madithati Venkata Reddi and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-14-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad331; (1950)IIMLJ298
Panchapakesa Ayyar, J.1. These are two appeals by Venkata Reddi and Vebulu, accused 3 and 4 in S. C. No. 42 of 1949 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Cuddappah. They have been convicted under Sections 302 and 34, Penal-Code, and sentenced to transportation for life, and also under Section 201, Penal Code, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years to run concurrently with the sentences under Section 302, Penal Code. The facts are briefly these. One Reddanna was living in Poanellavandlapalli in Rayachoti taluk in Guddappah district. Though he was married he was not on good terms with his wife for sometime before this murder and he was carrying on with a woman called Chinna Ammani of Ragatiguntapalli, an adjoining village. Accused 2 was also carrying on with the same Chinna Ammani Reddanna wanted to have this Chinna Ammani exclusively for himself, by marrying her, and accused 1 and 2 went and told him on 8-4-1949, that they would get him married to Ammani that midnight. So, ta...
N. Chinnakannu Pillai Vs. N.S. Sundaram
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-14-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad437; (1950)2MLJ607
ORDERViswanatha Sastri, J.1. This civil revision petition is directed against an interlocutory order of the Subordinate Judge of Tuticorin in O. P. No. 33 of 1949, a petition for the issue of a succession certificate under Succession Act (XXXIX [39] of 1925), holding that he had jurisdiction to entertain the application. The contention of the petitioner in this Court is that the Subordinate Judge had no jurisdication. There is no notification of the Provincial Government under Section 388(1), Succession Act, 1925, empowering Subordinate Judges to issue succession certificates. Under Section 26, Sub-section (3), Succession Certificate Act (vii [7] of 1889) there were three notifications by the Local Government conferring jurisdiction on Courts inferior to a District Court to issue succession certificates. Effect of these successions issued under that Act is one of the matters that fall to be decided in this case. The provisions of Act XIV [14] of 1926 passed by the Indian Legislature, w...
Minor Ramalingam Reddi by Next Friend Vanajakshi Ammal and anr. Vs. Ba ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-14-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad431; (1950)2MLJ597
Viswanatha Sastri, J.1. Defendants 1 and 3, a Hindu minor and his mother, are the appellants in this second appeal, defendant 2, an infant brother of defendant 1, having died pendente lite. The plaintiff, a Hindu widow, sued for specific performance of a contract for sale of 3 acres 7 cents of dryland entered into between her and the defendants and embodied in a compromise, Ex. P-3 dated 19-1-1914, and filed in S. 0. s. No. 65 of 1943. The land belonged to the plaintiff's deceased husband who sold it to her father on 9-1-1940. In S. o. S. No. 65 of 1943 the present defendants land 2, the grandsons and legal representatives of the vendee represented by their mother, the present defendant 3, as their next friend sued the present plaintiff for rent, alleging an oral lease under which the plaintiff's deceased husband had been let into possession of the land. In defence to that suit the plaintiff denied the tenancy and stated that she was in possession under an agreement for reconveyance of...
T.N. Venkataraman and ors. Vs. Pushkalammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-14-1950
Reported in: AIR1950Mad823; (1950)IIMLJ171
Chandra Reddi, J.1. This petition raises a question relating to jurisdiction of the First Additional First Class Magistrate of Trichinopoly to try an offence under Section 4 of Madras Act, VI [6] of 1949 said to have been committed at Trivandrum. The complainant is the first wife of accused 1, accused 4 being his second wife while accused 2 and 3 are his paternal uncle and aunt respectively. The first wife filed a complaint in the Court of the First Additional First Class Magistrate alleging that accused 1 married her on 25th May 1942, that ha subsequently abandoned her and married accused 4 who belongs to Travancore State at Trivandrum on 30th June 1949 and thereby committed an offence under Section. 4 of the said Act and that accused 2 and 3 abetted accused l and 4 in the commission of the said offence.2. The petitioners herein raised an objection before the trial Magistrate that he had no jurisdiction to try the case as the offence of bigamy is alleged to have been committed at Triv...
Adapala Subba Reddy and anr. Vs. Adapala Andemma and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad393; (1950)IIMLJ650
Rajamannar, C.J.1. This is an appeal against the order of the District Judge of Nellore on an application filed in O. P. No. 4 of 1919, a petition for the grant of probate of a will dated 22-7-1918 of one Venkatanarasa Reddi who died leaving behind him three widows, three daughters and two divided brothers. The first widow is the applicant for probate of the will which was registered during the lifetime of her deceased husband. To the petition, her co-widows, the daughters of the deceased and his brothers were made parties. An application was made pending the petition purporting to be under Sections 247 and 268, Succession Act and Sections 94 and 151 and Order 40, Rule 1, Civil P. C., for the appointment of an interim administrator or receiver to take possession of the entire estate and manage the same during the pendency of the probate proceedings.2. The estate comprises admittedly considerable extent of immovable property. The deceased was entitled to a third share. The properties ha...
In Re: C.M. Raghavan and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-1950
Reported in: AIR1950Mad814; (1950)IIMLJ195
ORDERChandra Reddy, J.1. This reference made by the Sessions Judge of North Malabar raises the question whether omission to examine the accused under Section 312, Criminal P. C., who was permitted to appear by counsel under Section 205, Criminal P. C., and whose counsel filed a statement on his behalf vitiates the trial.2. The accused in the cage was charged under Section 323, Penal Code, before a Bench of First Class Magistrates. In the course of the trial accused 1 was granted exemption from personal attendance under Section 205 Criminal P. C., as he was employed as a Havildar Clerk at Bombay. The Bench Magistrates believed the prosecution evidence that accused 1 along with accused 2 caused simple hurt to P. W. 1 and convicted the accused of an offence under Section 323, Penal Code.3. Both the accused filed a revision petition before the Sessions Judge against the conviction and sentence passed upon them by the First Class Bench, contending that the conviction of the petitioners was ...
In Re: Reddy Rajaratnam Reddi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-1950
Reported in: AIR1950Mad827; (1950)IIMLJ201
Chandra Reddi, J.1. This is a petition to quash the commitment of the petitioner for an offence under Section 302, Penal Code read with Section 115, Penal Code, in P. R. C. NO. 11 of 1949 by the Stationary Sub-Magistrate, Kurnool, The charge against the petitioner is that he approached P. W. 1 a doctor with a request to provide him with poison to enable him to kill his mistress with a view to get at her properties. The prosecution case is that one Veeramma who is P. W. 5 in the case has been the mistress of the accused for some years. She has two children, a daughter and a son, and the son being a minor, a court guardian was appointed for the property. The accused who has been on intimate terms with Veeramma and managing her affairs conceived the idea of getting at the property by doing away with her. For that purpose he approached P. W. 1 a doctor practicing in Kurnool with a request to supply him with poison and promised to pay him a sum of Rs. 2000 if the poison asked for was given ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »