Chennai Court September 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.
The Fire Stone Tyre and Rubber Co. of India Ltd. Vs. T.S. Ramanuja Aiy ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-25-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad672; (1951)IMLJ81
ORDERBalakrishna Ayyar, J.1. The principal question of law that I have to determine in these two civil revision petns is whether when a Full Bench of the Small Cause Court in the Presidency Town, Madras, has dismissed an appln for a new trial for default of appearance it is competent to that Ct to entertain an appln to set aside the order of dismissal for default.2. In support of his contention that it is competent to do so the learned advocate for the petnr advanced three arguments. The first was this. It has been decided in 'Lodd Govindoss Krishnadoss v. Rukmani Bai', 38 Mad 438 : AIR 1915 Mad 101 that when two or more Judges of the Small Cause Court are sitting together for the purpose of exercising the jurisdiction conferred by Section 38, Presidency Small Cause Courts Act, they are sitting 'in a suit' within the meaning of those words in Section 69, and if a reference is made to the H. C. under its provisions, such reference is valid. Order 9, Rule 9 empowers a Ct to set aside an ...
P.V. Eswara Iyer Vs. Sankunni Nair
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-22-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad591; (1951)IMLJ15
ORDERViswanatha Sastri, J.1. These civil revision petitions raise a question of law of some importance and that is whether an appeal is maintainable against an interlocutory order appointing a receiver in an original proceeding other than a suit, when the final order in the original proceeding is itself not open to appeal. The landlord, here petitioner, applied in O. p. Nos. 139 to 141 of 1948 on the file of the Court of the District Munsif of Palghat under Section 13(2) and (3), Malabar Tenancy Act, for fixing the fair rent in respect of the holding of the tenant, here respondent, and for a direction that he should pay one year's fair rent in advance or furnish security for the rent. There were interlocutory applications filed for the appointment of a receiver in case the tenant defaulted to pay the rent or furnish security. By his order dated 9-4-1949, the District Munsif directed the tenant to furnish security for Kanni rent on or before 20-4-1949, but the tenant failed to comply wi...
Devineni Narasamma Vs. Devineni Satyanarayana, Minor by Guardian Gondi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-22-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad793; (1951)IMLJ436
Viswanatha Sastri, J.1. This civil revn. petn. raises a question as to the amount of court-fee payable by the petnr. on a memorandum of appeal filed by her in the Ct. of the Dist. J., Ananta-pur against the decree of dismissal of her suit, O. S. No. 199 of 1947, by the Dist. Munsif's Ct. of Gooty. In para. 13 of the plaint she prayed for a decree 'cancelling the decree in O. S. No. 29 of 1942 on the file of this Ct. & all the proceedings in the appeal therefrom & the decree passed in the appeal A S. No. 91 of 1944; or declaring the same to be void, invalid, & not binding on the pltf.; & directing the defts, or such of them as may be found liable to pay the pltf. the costs of this suit.'O. S. No. 29 of 1942 was a suit filed by the present deft. 1 for possession of the lands described in Sens, A & B of the plaint, claiming title under a will executed by the pltf.'s deceased husband. The pltf. was impleaded as deft 3 & as a major in that suit, which ended in a decree in favour of deft. 1,...
Pallikkondi Matha Vs. Kaniyarakkal Natuvite Valappil Mayan Kunhi and a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-21-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad497; (1950)2MLJ764
Panchapakesa Ayyar, J.1. The civil miscellaneous second appeal raises an interesting question of law. Respondent 1, Mayan Kunhi, usufructuarily mortgaged certain properties to the decree-holder, Matha. Respondent 2 Kumaran, bought the equity of redemption from respondent 1, and also got a lease back of the property from the usufructuary mortgagee, Matha. Finally Matha filed a suit, O. S. No. 182 of 1933, and got a preliminary decree on 17-4-1936. There was an appliction by Kumaran for scaling down that decree under the Madras Agriculturists Eelief Act. By consent of all the parties, the decree amount was scaled down, on 4-7-1947 in I. A. No. 3264 of 1946. The mortgage amount was admitted to be Rs. 400, and the arrears of rent to be Rs. 8 for the year 1933, Rs. 64 for 1934-35, and Rs. 21-5-5 for the subsequent period till 11-7-1935. The amended decree was passed for the composite amount arrived at thus. When it was sought to be executed by Matha Kumaran contended that the decree was als...
S.O. Krishna Aiyar Vs. S.V. Narayanan Alias S.V. Doraiswami and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-21-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad660; (1951)IMLJ187
ORDERBalakrishna Ayyar, J.1. What the learned Judge has reallydone is to write a second judgment reversinghis first because on fuller argument and further consideration he thought that the view hehad first taken was wrong. This is clearly nota purpose for which Order 47 (1) is intended. Thispetn is allowed with costs and the proceedingsof the Ct below under the power of reviewwhich it supposed it had are set aside....
T.P. Muthuswami Iyer Vs. Dandayuthapani Alias Ayyasami Gurukkal, Minor ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-21-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad720
ORDER1. The pltf. is the petnr. In O.S. no. 4 of 1949 on the file of the Dist. Munsifs Ct. of Trichinopoly, he sued one Parvathammal on a promissory note which he alleged she had executed on 11-2-1946. The note recites that the sum of Rs. 1,000 referred to in it wasborrowed 'for the purpose of discharging the hand loans taken for the purpose of the funeral expenses, etc., of my husband who died last month & for other family expenses. 'Parvathammal filed a statement denying the execution of the note & also denying that she had borrowed any money from the pltf. Certain issues were framed & subsequently Parvathammal died. Thereupon the resp. before me a minor named Dandayuthapani alias Ayyaaami was added as deft. 2 on the ground that he was the adopted son of Parvathammal -& her hushand, Subbiah Gurukkal. Thereafter, the pltf. wanted to amend the plaint in order to secure two results (1) to convert the suit which was originally on the note into one on the debt; and (2) to make the estate ...
Valia Peetikayil Chandrankandi Kunhi Pathumma Vs. Ariyoth Ayammad and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-21-1950
Reported in: (1951)1MLJ100
Panchapakesa Ayyar, J.1. The simple point arising for decision in this second appeal is whether both the lower Courts were right in allowing the deposit within two months of 15th September, 1946 (the deposit was made actually on 8th November, 1948) construing the deposit required under Sub-section (5) of Section 4 of Madras Act XVII of 1946 of 'each year's rent as it accrues' to mean only the rent accruing at the end of each year, even where the rent is payable by custom or contract in two half-yearly instalments, on 15th March and 15th September. In the present case there is no difficulty at all because the matter was covered by a previous decision between the parties, in R.M.P. No. 392 of 1947, which operated as res judicata, and the appellant could not, therefore, be allowed to agitate the matter over again. But, even apart from this question of res judicata the better opinion appears to be to construe the year's rent as accruing at the end of the year. In Abdulla v. Patinhare Kottu...
Ponnuswamy and ors. Vs. O. Mahipathy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-19-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad55; (1950)2MLJ668
ORDERSomasundaram, J.1. This revision raises an interesting question of law, viz., whether a person who unlawfully enters into or upon the property in the possession of another so as to be guilty of criminal trespass can be held to be guilty ofthe offence if he unlawfully continues to remains there with one of the intentions mentioned herein. 2. The facts of the case are these. House-No. 8, Barbers Bridge, second lane belonged to the accused who had mortgaged it to the complainant. The bank brought the property to sale and itself purchased it in auction. Execution was taken for delivery of possession of the property. On 23-8-1947, bailiff came and delivered vacant possession of the property to the complainant. Subsequently on the same day the accused broke open the lock and occupied the house. A criminal complaint was laid and the accused was convicted on 14-6-1948 for trespass and sentenced to a fine of its. 75. The accused paid off the fine and continued to remain in possession. On 2...
V.G. Row Vs. the State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-14-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad147; (1951)IMLJ628
Satyanarayana Rao J.1. This is a petn. under Article 226, Const. Ind. for the issue of a writ of certiorari for calling the records & quashing the order of the State of Madras in G. O. No. Ms. 1517 Public General dated 10-3-1950 declaring under Section 16, Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1908, the People's Education Society as an unlawful assocn. The petnr. is the General Secretary of the People's Education Society registered in November 1947 under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (XXI [21] of 1860), & is also a barrister-at-law & an advocate of this Court & the Supreme Ct.2. The objects of the Society as stated in the affidavit of the petnr. are among others '(a) to encourage, promote, diffuse, & popularise useful knowledge in all science & more specially Social Science; (b) to encourage, promote, diffuse & popularise political education among people; (c) to encourage, promote or popularise the study & understanding of all social & political problems & bring about social & political r...
In Re: Annadhana Katlai Attached to Sri Thiagarajaswami Devasthanam, b ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-14-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Mad206; (1951)IMLJ466
ORDERCHandra Reddi, J.1. This civil revn. petn. raises a question of court fee & jurisdiction. The suit out of which this petn. arises relates to an extent of 48 acres & 55 cents of wet & dry lands situated in Perumbugalore vattam in Tanjore district, belonging to Annadana Katlai attached to Sri Thyagarajaswami Devasthanam, Tiruvarur. The pltf., who is the executive officer of Sri Thyagarajaswami temple appointed by the Hindu Religious Endowments Board, instituted the suit in the Ct. of the Subordinate Judge of Mayuram for recovering the suit land from the deft., after ejecting him, & for arrears of rent. The basis of the suit is the tenancy created under two lease deeds, one of 11-10-1906 & the other of 16-4-1908, both for a period of 11 years. It is alleged in the plaint that the annual rent reserved under these deeds was 40 kalams of paddy for wet lands & Rs. 4 for the dry lands. The plaint recited that in reply to a notice calling upon the deft, to surrender possession of the suit ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »