Chennai Court July 1950 Judgments
S. Devaraja Aiyar Vs. Dr. N. Srinivasan and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-1950
Reported in: (1950)2MLJ484
Balakrishna Ayyar, J.1. The plaintiff is the petitioner. He alleged that the first defendant had borrowed from him a large sum of money to meet the expenses of his education and that the second defendant who is the father-in-law of the first defendant, was a surety for the repayment of this amount. The first defendant, it appears, is now employed in Kapurthala. The second defendant is a retired Inspector of Schools, Travancore, who it was alleged in the plaint was then residing at Vadakku Valliyur,. Nanguneri taluk. In view of the fact that the first defendant lives in Kapurthala, the plaintiff applied under Section 20(b) of the Civil Procedure Code for leave of the Sub-Court at Tinnevelly to institute the suit against the first defendant in that Court also. The second defendant did not seriously contest that application; but the first defendant did. He alleged that he and his wife were not living together, hat since they separated he and his father-in-law were on bad terms, and that h...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: R.M. Kandaswami Mudaliar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-28-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad275; (1950)2MLJ495
ORDERMack, J.1. I do not think there is any need to issue notion on these three civil revision petitions. They arise out of three small cause suits filed by the plaintiff to recover moneys from thres different defendants. These suits were by consent taken on to the original side, filed and tried along with O. S. No. 474 of 1948 by the District Munsif of Vellore, a suit filed by the same plaintiff to recover a larger sum from another defendant. There were common defences and defendants 2-6 were impleaded on a contention that they were partners along with the plaintiff who claimed to be the solo proprietor of a business to whom these defendants were indebted. The learned District Munsif tried all the four suits together on common evidence and gave the plaintiff and defendants 2 to 8 a joint decree against the four separate main defendants. Plaintiff has filed a regular appeal in O. S. No. 474 of 1948 in the District Court, Vellore, and he has come by way of revision under Section 25, Pro...
Tag this Judgment!irulappa Konar and ors. Vs. Madhava Konar (Died) and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-28-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad733; (1951)IMLJ442
1. In this second appeal the few facts which I have to state for the purpose of the decision are as follows: The suit was for damages for malicious prosecution which the trial Ct decreed with costs. On appeal taken by the defts the decree of the trial Ct was revsd & the suit dismissed with costs. The pltf having thereafter died his legal representatives preferred this second appeal to this Ct. After the institution of the second appeal, the deft having died, the applts herein have brought the resps before me as legal representatives.2. To the Rearing of this second appeal an objection 'in limine' has been taken by the resps founded on the rule 'actio personalis moritur cum persona'. I have heard arguments not only on the objection but also on the merits of the second appeal. As regards the latter I may at once say that there is very little, if any, of substance in the argument for the applts. The report of the Comr appointed by the lower appellate Ct is said to be additional evidence t...
Tag this Judgment!Srimathi Champakam Dorairajan and anr. Vs. the State of Madras, Repres ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-27-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad120; (1950)IIMLJ404
Rajamannar, C.J.1. In these two applns. substantially the same questions fall to be decided & they were, therefore, heard together. In C. M. P. No. 5255 of 1950 the petnr. is one Srimathi Champakam Dorairajan. In the affidavit filed by her in support of the appln., she states that she is a graduate of the Madras University having passed in 1934 the B. A. degree examination taking Physios & Chemistry for her subjects, that owing to financial & other difficulties she could not join forthwith or seek to join the Medical College, that she has since been able to decide on reading for a medical degree, that she made enquiries with regard to her admission into the Government Medical College at Madras in the M. B. B. S. course, that she ascertained that in respect of admissions into the said College the authorities were enforcing & observing an order of the Govt. referred to as the Communal Government Order, in & by which the admission into the Medical College is to be regulated not by qualifi...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Devanugraham
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-25-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad255; (1950)2MLJ333
Panchapagesa Sastri, J.1. This is an appeal by G. Do-vanugraham, Food Inspector of the Corporation of Madras, against his conviction and sentence by the Fifth Presidency Magistrate for an offence under Section 161, Penal Code. He has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment foe six months and to a fine of Rs. 800.2. Learned counael for the appellant raised a number of points. Firstly he contended that the evidence did not make oat the offence. Secondly he urged that the investigation was by an Inspector who had not the requisite sanction to act under the Prevention of Corruption Act. Thirdly he contended that the evidence had not been recorded in extenso by the Presidency Magistrate. Lastly he urged that the sanction granted by the Commissioner of the Madras Corporation evidenced by EX. P 6 was not legal.3. It is conceded by the State Prosecute that if the sanction granted is illegal then the conviction cannot stand. The ground of objection urged against the validity of the sanction is ...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Raman Ambalam and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-25-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad258; (1950)2MLJ373
Govinda Menon, J. 1. The petitioners were sentenced to various terms of imprisonment by the learned Second Assistant Sessions Judge of Mathurai which sentences were confirmed on appeal by the learned Sessions Judge of the same division and in revision the question has been raised regarding the correctness of the convictions and sentences. 2. The charges framed against them were that petitioner 1 on or about 27-1-1949 at Siru-marudakanmoi of Ucharichanpatti village committed robbery of the property of one Sundara-rajan Ambalam along with the other two petitioners and that at the time of committing the said robbery, petitioner 1 used a deadly weapon to wit an aruval and voluntarily caused grievous hurt to the said Sundararajan Ambalam thereby committing an offence under Section 392 read with Section 397, Penal Code. As against the other two petitioners, the charge was that they were conjointly concerned with petitioner 1 in committing the robbery of the property of Sundararajan Ambalam a...
Tag this Judgment!Mahamad Beary and anr. Vs. T. Hassan Kutty and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-24-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad280; (1950)2MLJ623
Bajamannar C.J. 1. This is an application for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the Subordinate Judge of South Kanara dated 5-4-1949 passed in C. M. A. no. 6 of 1949 under Section 12(1), Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, The application has been made under Article 226, Constitution of India. A preliminary objection was taken that the application was not sustainable because the order sought to be quashed became final long before Article 226 Game into force. The respondent's counsel relied upon the rule of law that a judicial order which has become final according to the state of the law at the time it was passed is not open to interference by way of appeal or revision or other proceedings by virtue of a subsequent amendment of the law. The respondent relied upon two rulings of this Court in Examiner of Local Fund Accounts v. Subramania, Mudliar, I. L R (1943) Mad. 501 : A. I. R 1943 Mad. 208 and Abdul Rasak v. Abdul Rahim, 1946-1 M.L.J. 480 A.I.R.1915 ...
Tag this Judgment!Sivasubramania Pillai Vs. Abisheka Kattalai Sri Thiagarajaswami Devast ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-24-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad392; (1950)2MLJ470
Raghava Rao, J.1. The facts of this case lie in a short and narrow compass. The suit property consists of 4 acrea of land in the village of Tiru-varur Vadakusethi. It was originally a village by itself known as Settikulam. A title deed (Ex. P-5 dated 26-4-1865) was granted to the plaintiff by the Inam Commissioner as appears from EX. D-5, an extract from tha register of inams of 13-8-1864. Under col. 21 in that document the foilowing appears:'This is entered and recognised in the district accounts as an entire inam village though small in extent. It may have been originally part of another village, but it is not known now whether it was so.'In later documents beginning with EX. P-9 of 1886, a descriptive memoir of Tiruvarur Vada-kusethi of the Nagapattinam taluk, the suit property appears as part of this latter village. The plaintiff temple sued the defendants in the present case for recovery of the plaint pro-perty with past rent and future damages for use and occupation on the footin...
Tag this Judgment!C.S. Gopal Vs. Industrial Tribunal Madras and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad395; (1950)2MLJ655
Rajamannar, C.J.1. The management of the Madras Engineering Works which is the applicant before us in this application made a reference to the Industrial Tribunal for Engineering Firms and Type Foundaries, Madras on 7-7-1949, requesting permission to suspend work for two months as the firm was suffering loss and needed time to make arrangements for continuing the business. Subsequently, on 27-7-1919, the management requested permission for permanent closure. There was, however, an experiment to find out if the concern couldbe successfully continued and the work was continued till 8-9-1949; but even during this short experimental period loss was incurred. In the circumstances both parties agreed that the business should be closed. The Tribunal permitted the closure of the work with effect from 9-9-1949. There is now no dispute in this matter.2. What the applicant complains is the direction made by the Tribunal that the management should pay all the workers half a month's wage for every ...
Tag this Judgment!Rao Bahadur A. Nathamooni Chetti Vs. M.R. Viswanatha Sastry and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-19-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad250; (1950)2MLJ448
Rajamannar, C.J. 1. This is an application to quash the order of the Court of Small Causes passed in a House Rent Appeal. The order sought to be quashed is dated 21-10-1948. No doubt the learned advocate for the petitioner is right in saying that there are circumstances which account for the delay. Though there is no specific period of limitation, it has generally been the accepted practice of this Court not to exercise the extraordinary power by way of the issue of prerogative writs when there hag been a long delay since the passing of the order sought to be quashed. We, therefore, dismiss the appli-cation on this ground, but in the circumstances we make no order as to costs. ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »