Chennai Court November 1959 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.
S. Sankaranarayana Ayyar (Died) and ors. Vs. Lakshmi Ammal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-16-1959
Reported in: (1960)1MLJ215
Anantanarayanan, J.1. A.S. No. 462 of 1955 is an appeal by defendants 1 to 6 in the Court below in a suit instituted informa pauperis by a Hindu widow for recovery of arrears of maintenance, and for enhancement of maintenance and raiment allowance. A.S. No. 492 of 1955 is an appeal by the widow upon grounds that she ought to have been granted enhanced maintenance and raiment allowance as prayed for. In this appeal, there is a memorandum of cross-objections filed by respondents 5 and 6, particularly objecting, inter alia, to any enhancement of maintenance from the date of demand by the widow (15th December, 1945), as decreed by the learned Additional Subordinate Judge of Tirunelveli.2. The background of facts may be briefly set forth as follows: One Sri V. Subbuswami Ayyar was a vakil of Vannarpet who had extensive properties, and he died in 1905 leaving a very rich estate. His four sons were Subramania Ayyar, Srinivasa Ayyar, Ramachandra Ayyar and Sankaranarayana Ayyar (first defendant...
R. Palaniappa Mudaliar Vs. M.M. Mariappa Mudaliar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-13-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Mad343
(1) The decree-holder, appellant in the lower court, prefers this appeal from the judgment and decree of the District Judge of Tiruchirapalli dated 2-9-1957 in A. S. 331 of 1956 on his file.(1a) The appellant obtained a decree for money against the respondent in the court of the District Munsif, Karur, on 9-9-1948. He filed an application E. A. No. 269 of 1953 on 14-2-1953 in the court of the District Munsif, Karur, for the transfer of the decree to the District Munsif's Court, Tiruchirapalli for execution. Notice of that application was sent to the judgment-debtor-respondent. He did not appear. An order was passed ex parte directing the transfer of the decree to the District Munsif's Court, Tiruchirapalli. In the District Munsif's court, Tiruchirapalli the appellant filed E. P. No. 460 of 1953 for the execution of the decree. That application was dismissed as not pressed.Then on 3-4-1956 the appellant filed E. P. No. 302 of 1956 in the court of the District Munsif Karur, praying that ...
Ramakrishnan and ors. Vs. Kandaswami Pillai (Died) and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-13-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Mad392
(1) This is an appeal by defendants 2, 3 and 7 in the lower court in a suit by reversioners which was decreed by the grant of a declaration that plaintiffs and defendants 4 to 6 were the nearest reversioners entitled to succeed to the estate of Ponnusami Pillai alias Ramkrishna Pillai, the husband of the first defendant, who died over 40 years ago. The first defendant had executed a settlement deed dated 21-11-1951 (original of Ex. A. 2), and the learned Subordinate Judge of Sivaganga also gave finding that this would not be binding upon the reversioners after the death of the first defendant, in respect of the suit properties, with the exception, in item 16, which is not within the scope of the present appeal. The appeal really resolves itself into one upon the propriety of the finding that the adoption of the 7th defendant by the first defendant was neither true, nor valid in the sense of being supported by the permission of the sapindas. This is the crux of the matter which has been...
P.R.M. Abdul Huq Vs. Katpadi Industries Ltd. and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-11-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Mad482
ORDER(1) This is an application by one P. R. M. Abdul Huq, to remove his name as director of the Katpadi Industries Ltd.(2) Notice of this application was given to the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies and his counter affidavit has been filed.(3) The facts are: The Katpadi Industries Limited was registered as a public company on 22-2-1950. Its authorised capital is Rs. 2,00,000 divided into 20,000 share of Rs. 10/- each. The last list of members and summary filed by the company under S. 32 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913, and brought on record in the office of the Registrar of Companies was one made up to 30-1-1955. Therein this applicant is shown as a director of the company as on that date. On 2-10-1955, the applicant intimated that he was submitting his resignation from the board of directors. The company, however, on being asked by the Registrar in his letter dated 17-2-1956 to state when the applicant ceased to be a director, there was no reply from the company.The Registrar ad...
Alamelu Achi Vs. Meenakshi Achi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-11-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Mad536
(1) This is a second appeal sought to be preferred against the decree and judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge of Devakottai in A. S. No. 46 of 1958 confirming the decree and judgment of the learned District Munsif of Devakottai in O. S. No. 144 of 1957. The facts of the case have been fully set out in the judgments of the courts below and need not be reset here.(2) On relevant and acceptable evidence both the Courts below came to the conclusion that the settlement in question was a pre-nuptial settlement of gift and that it was brought into existence by collusion of the parties thereto to defeat and, defraud the creditors of the heavily indebted settlors' family and that the transaction was not at all a bona fide one. The lower Court also approached the case from the standpoint whether the defendants have satisfactorily established that the transaction was not bona fide but brought into existence to defeat and delay the creditors of the settlor and came to the conclusion that the...
In Re: Southern Automative Corporation (Private) Limited
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-11-1959
Reported in: (1960)1MLJ230
Ramaswami, J.1. This is an application for dispensing with the calling of an Extraordinary General Meeting of the Southern Automotive Corporation (Private) Limited, Madras.2. The Southern Automotive Corporation (Private) Limited, has filed a petition for obtaining the sanction of this Court for amalgamation with another company, viz., the South India Automotive Corporation, (Private), Limited, which is carrying on similar business in the city of Madras. Section 394 of the Indian Companies Act, 1956, requires the convening of an Extraordinary General Meeting of the members under the directions of this Court under Section 391 of the said Act for the purpose of considering and passing the proposed arrangement for amalgamation. The applicant wants this procedure to be short-circuited on the ground that there was a General Meeting of the Members on 15th June, 1959 and that they have approved unanimously this arrangement for amalgamation, and that therefore the holding of an Extraordinary Ge...
Public Prosecutor Vs. Sampath Kumar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-10-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Mad256; 1960CriLJ922
(1) This is an appeal by the State against the acquittal of the respondent in C. C. No. 946 of 1959 on the file of the Sub Magistrate No. 1(J), Tiruchirapalli.(2) The Municipal Commissioner, Srirangam Municipality, filed a complaint against the respondent herein for non-payment of house-tax for the years 1951-52, 1952-53 and 1953-54. The complaint was first laid before the court of Bench Magistrates, Srirangam, who took the case on file and issued summons for appearance of the accused. In spite of several summonses and even bailable warrants the appearance of the accused could not be secured. Finally, it is stated, the proceedings were stopped under S. 249 Cri P. C. by the District Magistrate, Tiruchirapalli, in his order, L. Dis. 10667/54 dated 30-11-1954.(3) While the case was thus pending, on 16-10-1958, the Municipal Commissioner applied to the court of Bench of Magistrates to reopen the case, apparently because the accused was available. Summons was issued to the accused who, aft...
The Union of India Vs. Jayaram Damodhar Timiri
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-09-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Mad325; (1960)IILLJ212Mad
(1) This is an appeal from the judgment and decree of Rajagopala Aiyangar J. in a suit on the original side of this court. C. S. No. 11 of 1952, filed in forma pauperis by the respondent, Jayaram Damodar Timiri, for the recovery of sums of money from the Union of India in the following circumstances. The plaintiff-respondent was appointed temporary clerk in the Military Accounts section of the Defence department of the Union of India on 6-9-1943. It is common ground that one of the terms of the appointment was that if the Government or the appointing officer shall at any time become desirous of dispensing with the service of the employee, the Government or the appointing officer shall give the employee one calendar month's notice in writing of such desire, and the Government or the appointing officer may, at any time without notice, dispense with the services of the employee for gross misconduct, of which misconduct the officer dispensing with the services of the employee shall be the...
Kothanda Naidu and ors. Vs. M. Kuppayya Naidu and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-09-1959
Reported in: (1960)1MLJ329
Anantanarayanan, J.1. This is an appeal instituted in forma pauperis by the plaintiffs in the lower Court (minors represented by their next friend) against the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Vellore, granting a preliminary decree for partition and making provision for the payment of certain debts binding upon these minor coparceners. It is sufficient here to state that the plaintiffs are the minor sons of the first defendant, that the first defendant was adjudged an insolvent in I.P. No. 10 of 1953 and that the second defendant is the Official Receiver, North Arcot, representing the estate in insolvency.2. The main contention of the appellants with regard to the debts proved in suit, for which provision was made by the Court in passing the preliminary partition decree, was that their father (first defendant) led a reckless, improvident and immoral life and that these debts are clearly avyavaharika debts not binding on the appellants. We think it is sufficient f...
S.V.R. Natarajan Chettiar and ors. Vs. the State of Madras, by Collect ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-09-1959
Reported in: (1960)2MLJ150
Anantanarayanan, J.1. The appellants are plaintiffs 2 to 5 in a suit before the learned Subordinate Judge of Devakottai for a declaration that the suit village was not an Inam estate within the definition of Act XXVI of 1948 and Section 3(2)(d) of the Madras Estates Land Act, that Act XXX of 1947 did not apply to it, and that the relevant Notifications of the State Government applying the two Acts to the village were illegal.2. The learned Subordinate Judge held that the suit was not maintainable, and he pointed out that under Section 9(4)(c) of Act XXVI of 1948, the decision of the Tribunal upon the issue in the suit was final, and not liable to be challenged in a Court of law. The arguments addressed before us resolved themselves into the following proposition. Though it may be indisputable that the decisions of the relevant Tribunals established under Act XX V I of 1948 and Act XXX of 1947 are conclusive upon the question that the village is an Inam estate within the meaning of Sect...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »