Chennai Court January 1956 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.
Murugayyan Kangiar Vs. Marudayyammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-1956
Reported in: (1956)2MLJ86
P.V. Rajamannar, C.J.1. The petitioner is the defendant in a suit O.S. No. 136 of 1952 in the Court of the District Munsiff of Tiruvaiyaru. The decree was passed against him ex parte on 31st July, 1952. On 29th September, 1952, he filed an application under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure to set aside the ex parte decree passed against him. He alleged that he came to know of the decree only on 20th September, 1952.2. The ground on which he based his application to have the ex parte decree against him set aside was that summons was not duly served on him. The material facts, as to which there is practically no dispute, are that the summons was sent to him by registered post and was returned with the endorsement of the postman 'refused'. The question is whether there was on these facts sufficient service in law. Postal service of summons was introduced by Sub-rule (3) of Rule 9 of Order 5, which runs as follows:Where the defendant resides in India whether within the juris...
Sundaresa Mudaliar Vs. Muthammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-03-1956
Reported in: (1956)IILLJ52Mad
Ramaswami, J.1. This is an appeal preferred against the order made by the Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Madras, in W.C. Case No. 747 of 1953.2. The facts are: The deceased Murugan was employed as a motor-driver under Sri Sundaresa Mudaliar. This Sundaresa Mudaliar--besides owning three motor cars, had also 7 or 8 motor pump sets in Mallamo-oppanampatti and elsewhere, for irrigating his lands. On 10 May 1953 this Murugan accompanied by another employee of this Sundaresa Mudaliar, viz., David, went to Mallamo-oppanampatti to repair a motor pump set which had gone out of order. David got into the well first and the deceased Murugan went next to him and in the act of getting into the well steadied himself by getting hold of a twig which unfortunately gave way with the result that the deceased fell into the well head downwards and injured his head and as a result thereof died the next day. The wife of that Murugan filed this application for compensation under the Workm...
William Jacks and Company Limited Vs. the State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-03-1956
Reported in: [1956]7STC327(Mad)
Basheer Ahmed Sayeed, J.1. These two appeals arise out of the common judgment of the learned Principal City Civil Judge in O.S. No. 1442 of 1951. The plaintiff company sued the State of Madras for recovery of a sum of Rs. 7,121-11-4 together with interest at six per cent per annum on the ground that the sums claimed represented illegal levy of tax claimed by the Government and paid by the assessee. This was resisted by the Government on various grounds which have been referred to in the judgment of the Principal City Civil Judge. The learned City Civil Judge ultimately came to the conclusion on the evidence placed before him that the plantiff was entitled to a refund of Rs. 4,010-3-3 and proportionate costs. He dismissed the claim of the plaintiff for the balance amount with costs. Both the plaintiff company and the State of Madras have preferred the appeals, C.C.C.A. Nos. 31 and 35 of 1954 respectively.2. So far as C.C.C.A. No. 35 of 1954 is concerned, the learned counsel for the Stat...
S.A.N.M. Ramakrishna Chetti Vs. Chinna Thangavelu Chetti and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-03-1956
Reported in: (1956)2MLJ101
Krishnaswami Nayudu, J.1. The plaintiff is the appellant. The first defendant and his brother one Appadurai sold certain lands to the fourth defendant on 29th November, 1935. There was an agreement between them to reconvey the properties under certain circumstances. But when reconveyance was demanded in pursuance of the agreement, the fourth defendant refused to comply with the demand and O.S. No. 7 of 1946 was thereafter instituted by the first defendant and his brother for specific performance of the agreement to reconvey. The suit was decreed and the first defendant and his brother had to deposit a sum of Rs. 2,750 into Court before reconveyance could be executed in their favour. The case of the plaintiff is that the first defendant approached him as he had not the funds to enable him to make the deposit and wanted accommodation and the sum of Rs. 2,750 was advanced by the plaintiff to the first defendant and his brother under the terms of the agreement entered into between them, Ex...
Mahalingam Pillai Vs. Amsavalli
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-03-1956
Reported in: (1956)2MLJ289
Ramaswami, J.1. This is an appeal preferred against the order made by the learnt Subordinate Judge of Kumbakonam in O.P. No. 43 of 1953.2. The facts are: The appellant-petitioner before us Mahalingam Pillai is the husband of the respondent Amsavalli. The appellant is a resident of Poundarigapuram village and the respondent is a resident of Abhishekamangalam village in Nannilam Taluk. The married life of this couple pawed short-lived. The case for the husband in a notice which he gave before filing this O.P. was that the respondent had left him to lead an openly immoral and improper life. In this petition his case was that she had eloped with one Saravana Pillai, P.W. 4, of Maruvancheri in Nannilam Taluk in January, 1952 and has been living with him as his concubine openly. The case for the wife was that this appellant has had incestuous relationship with his sister Gundu Achi and that on that account there were quarrels-and finally the petitioner beat her, removed her tali, branded and...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›