Chennai Court February 1954 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: K.V. Narasimha Rao, Administrator, Appointed by the High Court ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-09-1954
Reported in: 1954CriLJ1556; (1954)IIMLJ474
ORDERBalakrishna Aiyar, J.1. In the morning on 10-5-1953, the bus MDK 877 was running from Vijayawada to Bandar. At about 8-15 a.m. it was stopped at Vuyyur and checked by HC. 1102. , He noticed that there was no tarpaulin in the bus. He therefore laid a charge-sheet against the company represented by its administrator for violation of the Rule 380 of the rules framed under the Motor Vehicles Act. The Sub-Magistrate convicted the accused and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 5. On appeal, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Nuzwid confirmed the conviction and dismissed the appeal. The present petition has been filed to revise , that order.2. The defence of the accused was that there was no rain that day at the time and that therefore he was under no obligation to carry any tarpaulin at the time. The learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate negatived the contention in these terms : It was contended for appellant in the appeal that the learned Magistrate was not correct in finding the accused guilt...
In Re: U.R. Ramaswami
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-05-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad1020
ORDERSomasundaram, J. 1. This is a reference by the District Magistrate of Madurai under the following circumstances. 2. In C. C. N. 14 of 1953 on the file of the Honorary Special 1st Class Magistrate, Madurai, the accused was convicted on a pica of guilty of the offence of criminal breach of trust in respect, of a sum of Rs. 300. The case of the complainant was that the accused represented himself to be a merchant dealing in broken glass pieces, and obtained an advance of Rs. 300 from the complainant in two instalments, one of Rs. 200 on 22-1-1953 and another Rs. 100 on 13-2-1953, agreeing to supply certain, quantity of glass pieces to him within a fixed period. The glass pieces were not supplied within the stipulated time and when he Was pressed by the complainant regarding the same, the accused gave a cheque on 18-3-1953 to the complainant, which cheque was dishonoured as there was no balance to the credit of the accused at that time. 3. On these facts, the Magistrate framed a charg...
Sivakami Ammal Vs. Bangaruswami Reddi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-05-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad1039; (1954)IIMLJ396
ORDERPanchapakesa Ayyar, J. 1. This is a petition by one Sivakami: Animal against her husband, Bangaruswami. Reddy, who has obtained a decree for dissolution, against her in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Salem, for giving her Rs. 100 a month as maintenance during the pendency of her appeal and Rs. 350 for her expenses in prosecuting the appeal. The petition has been made under Section 5. (7) of Madras Act 6 of 1949. It is opposed vigorously. The respondents' contentions are five, and I shall consider them 'seriatim' below.2. The first is that the petitioner has deserted the respondent, and that the respondent will only be too happy if she were to live with him and to give him the conjugal rights lie is entitled to, and that therefore a woman like that should not be given relief under Section 5 (7). I am afraid that contention cannot be upheld in this petition because Section 5 (7) does not entitle the Court to go into an enquiry as to the moral merits of the husband and wife 'i...
V. Soundaryammal Vs. A. Lakshminarayana Rao and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-05-1954
Reported in: (1956)1MLJ97
Umamaheswaram, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the landlady as against the order of the Judge of Small Causes in H.R.A. No. 561 of 1950 and 586 of 1949 fixing the rent of the building at Rs. 75. An application was made to the Additional Rent Controller, Madras, for fixation of fair rent for the downstairs portion of the bungalow in the occupation of the respondents before me. The Rent Controller inspected the premises and fixed the rent at Rs. 105 per month. On appeal, the appellate Judge reduced the rent to Rs. 75. He held that the value of the building and the improvements effected amounted to Rs. 30,000 and calculating interest at the rate of 6 per cent, he arrived at the figure of Rs. 75 per month for the downstairs portion.2. In think that the appellate Judge erred in interfering with the rent fixed by the Rent Controller who took into account all factors and fixed the rent., The tax payable in respect of the house comes to Rs. 800 per year. Deducting, repair charges...
Balakrishna Industrial Works Vs. C.S. Venkatachari and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad883; (1954)IIMLJ290
1. This is a civil miscellaneous appeal against the order of the City Civil Judge dismissing an application filed by the appellant for temporary injunction. The appeal was filed on 25-1-1954, but it was not accompanied by a decretal order. Along with the appeal, an application was filed for dispensing with the production of the decretal order. Basheer Ahmed Sayeed J. by an order dated 27-1-1954, dispensed with the production for the time being, on the appellant undertaking to produce the same within six weeks. The same learned Judge made an order issuing a temporary injunction pending disposal of the civil miscellaneous appeal. The respondent filed a Letters Patent Appeal against that order, and a Division Bench of this Court, consisting of the Chief Justice and Umamaheswaram J. suspended the order made by Basheer Ahmed Sayeed J. but directed the above civil miscellaneous appeal and the Letters Patent appeal to be posted before a Bench today, and it is accordingly posted before us.2. L...
Kunala Bapaiah (Died) and anr. Vs. Vedantam Subbarao and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad878
1. This is an appeal against the judgment of Panchapakesa Aiyar J. in C. M. S. A. No. 117 of 1948. It arises out of an application in the execution of a mortgage decree passed in O. S. No. 11 of 1942 by the subordinate Judge of Tenali on 20-7-1942. The decree was against two defendants, namely, Subba Rao and Lakshmipathi. As the Madras Agriculturists' Relief Act had come into operation by the date of the institution of the suit, the mortgagee alleged that of the two defendants the first defendant was not an agriculturist; he admitted that the 2nd defendant was an agriculturist and therefore entitled to the benefits of the Act. He, therefore, prayed for a decree so far as the first defendant was concerned for the full amount of Rs. 3439-3-4 due under the mortgage and against the 2nd defendant for a sum of Rs. 2854 only being the amount after scaling down.For some reason or other, it was not even attempted to be argued that Section 14 of the Act applied to the ease. It was conceded on be...
In Re: Bommisetty Ramayamma
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad880; (1954)IMLJ544
ORDERPanchapakesa Aiyar, J.1. The office has objected to the maintainability of the Civil Revision Petition sought to be filed by the petitioner. I nave heard the petitioner's counsel. The facts are rather curious. The petitioner filed O. P. No. 57 of 1951 on the file of the Sub-Court, Bapatla, under Order 33, Rule 1, Civil P. C., for leave to sue as a pauper. Her petition was rejected on 6-8-1953 and she was directed to pay court-fee due on the plaint, and ten days' time was fixed for it. She failed to pay the court-fee within the time fixed, and the pauper plaint rejected on 20-8-1953. She has now filed a civil revision petition against the order dated 6-S-I953, refusing leave to file the suit in 'forma pauperis', but, unfortunately, only after the later order dated 20-8-1953 rejecting the pauper plaint.2. A Pull Bench of this Court, to which I too Was a party, has held in -- 'Satyanarayana-charyulu v. Ramalirigam', : AIR1952Mad86 (A), (the ruling relied on by the office) that where ...
In Re: Mahammad Sultan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-03-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad92; 1955CriLJ349
ORDERBalakrishna Ayyar, J.1. The District Magistrate (Judicial) Vellore has convicted the petitioner under S. 4 (l)(j), Madras Prohibition Act, and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 100.2. The petitioner is the Manager of the Municipal Office, Ambur. It appears that he was visiting one Mrs. Ranjitham, a midwife in the service of the municipality. His visits to the house of the woman was resented by the neighbours. At about 7-45 p.m. on 28-7-1953 the petitioner went to the house of Mrs. Ranjitham and stayed there for over an hour. Presently a crowd gathered outside the house and this crowd took the accused, the midwife and F. W. 2 to the police station some time after 9-30 p.m. by which time the crowd had become about 2000 strong. The Sub-Inspector noticed that the petitioner had some injuries on his person. So he sent him to P. W. 1, the Municipal doctor for examination and certificate. In the first instance, the Sub-Inspector did not ask for a certificate from the doctor whether the ...
In the Matter of the Debts of B.V. Gam, Intestate, Deceased
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-03-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad681
ORDERRamaswami, J.1. This is a novel application for refund of court-fee of Rs. 600.2. The facts are: The petitioner applied for a succession certificate to collect certain debts due to her deceased husband including a sum of Rs. 20,000 due on a draft by Messrs Prudential Co-operative Central and Urban Bank Ltd., Madras, and paid succession duty for all items including this item. On the necessary formalities prescribed having been complied with, this petition was posted for hearing and on no objection forthcoming, succession certificate was granted as prayed for. This was on 19-10-1948. It is stated that five years thereafter, a succession certificate in regard to this item was applied for in the Court of the District and Sessions Judge of Secunderabad Division, on an objection raised by the Prudential Co-operative Central and Urban Bank Ltd., Secunderabad, that the succession certificate issued by the Madras High Court will not be operative in Secunderabad being outside the jurisdicti...
Chaparala Krishna Brahman Vs. Guduru Govardhanaiah
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-03-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad822; [1954]25ITR407(Mad)
ORDERBalakrishna Ayyar, J.1. The petitioner is the first accused in T. R. C. Nos. 1 and 2 of 1953 and C. C. No. 8 of 1953 on the file of the Stipendiary I Class Magistrate, Guntur. The comnlainant in all these cases is one Guduru Govardhanaiah who was a partner of the accused in a firm called Chaparala Krishna Brahman and Co. Guntur. The substance of the allegations made by the complainant in p. R. C. No. 1 of 1953 is this. The partners in the firm fell out and there was litigation between them in the civil Courts in Guntur. With a view to cause loss to the complainant the accused prepared false accounts. He also filed before the Income-tax Officer form bearing the date 4-2-1952 for the renewal of the registration of the firm. That form is a forged one. In order to fasten responsibility for his false accounts and also liability to income-tax on P. W. l and the complainant, the accused probably antedated some renewal form, signatures on which of the complainant and P. W. 1 may have been...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »