Chennai Court June 1970 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.
N.S. Kuppuswamy Odayar and anr. Vs. the Panchayat Narthangudi, Represe ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-30-1970
Reported in: (1971)1MLJ190
M.M. Ismail, J.1. The appellants herein instituted O.S. No. 351 of 1962 on the file of the Court of the District Munsif of Valangiman at Kumbakonam for declaration of their right to a tank and to the fishery rights therein situate in R.S. No. 73/2 in Narthangudi Village and for a permanent injunction restraining the respondents from interfering with their possession of the same, or, in the alterative for recovery of possession of the tank with the fishery rights therein.2. The appellants claimed title to the tank and the fishery rights therein, having exercised the same for more than hundred years, and they came to file suit only because the first respondent-panchayat purported to lease out the fishery rights in the tank by public auction on 23rd April, 1962. The appellants claimed title to the property and also in the alternative claimed that even if they were not the original owners of the tank and the fishery rights they had perfected their title by adverse possession. On the other ...
R. Venkatachalam Vs. Personnel Officer, Personnel Branch, Southern Rai ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-1970
Reported in: (1970)IILLJ625Mad
ORDERT. Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. The petitioner was in the permanent service of the Southern Railway for well over twenty-three years. He joined the erstwhile M.S.M. Railway company as a mechanic and riveter boy in the year 1928. Then he resigned the service and joined the army and was a combatant during the second world war. He served there from 1940 to 1946 and was discharged therefrom at or about that time. Thereafter, he registered himself in the Employment Exchange and produced before it his military discharge certificate, which has been produced before me and perused by me in the presence of learned Counsel for the petitioner. Under the caption 'age' it was mentioned that the petitioner was twenty-nine years of age, Through the Employment Exchange, and as a fresh recruit, the petitioner obtained service under the first respondent. It is not disputed that at that time the military discharge certificate which formed part of the records which were forwarded by the petitioner to the Emp...
K.M. Subramaniam Vs. the State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-26-1970
Reported in: (1970)IILLJ711Mad
Veeraswamy, C.J.1. This appeal comes before us under the Letters Patent from the judgment of Kailasam J. who dismissed the second appeal but granted leave.2. The appellant was a Senior Inspector in the Co-operative Department on a salary of Rs. 106/- per mensem. On 16th October 1952 certain charges were framed against him with the result, he reverted to the lower post of the Junior Inspector with effect from 24th November 1952 with a pay of Rs. 79 per mensem as a punishment. The appellant successfully contested the legality of this order in O.S. 153 of 1954 on the file of the court of the District Munsiff, Tiruchirapalli who gave a declaration that the order of punishment reverting the appellant was illegal. Thereafter the appellant brought the suit out of which this appeal before us arises for recovery of a sum of Rs. 5943.01 as arrears of salary. The first two courts as well as Kailasam J. have all agreed that the claim was not well founded.3. The order of reversion was dated 24th No...
Srimathi Unnamalai Ammal and anr. Vs. Sri Vellaya Pillai Alias Kalia P ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-26-1970
Reported in: (1971)1MLJ147
P.R. Gokulakrishnan, J.1. The defendants are the appellants herein.2. The suit was for a declaration that the first defendant (first appellant herein) is entitled to enjoy the suit properties only till her lifetime and that the othi deed dated 14th September, 1961, executed by her in favour of the second defendant (second appellant herein) is not binding on the plaintiff (respondent herein). The plaintiff's case was that the suit properties originally belonged to one Kalia Pillai, the paternal grandfather of the plaintiff. Kalia Pillai had three sons : the plaintiff's father Vaiyapuri, the first defendant's husband Palaniappa, and another, Muthappa Pillai. After the father's death, the three sons divided the family properties and each enjoyed his separate share thereof. Muthappa Pillai and his wife died leaving no issues. The plaintiff was in enjoyment of Muthappa Pillai's properties. The first defendant's husband Palaniappa died thirty-two years ago leaving no issues. The first defend...
K.M. Subramaniam Vs. the State of Madras, Represented by the Secretary ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-26-1970
Reported in: (1971)1MLJ221
K. Veeraswami, C.J.1. This appeal comes before us under the Letters Patent from the judgment of Kailasam, J., who dismissed the second appeal but granted leave.2. The appellant was a Senior Inspector in the Co-operative Department on a salary of Rs. 1O6 per mensem. On 16th October, 1952, certain charges were framed against him with the result, he was reverted to the lower post of junior inspector with effect from 24th November, 1952, with a pay of Rs. 79 per mensem as a punishment. The appellant successfully contested the legality of this order in O.S. No. 153 of 1954 on the file of the Court of the District Munsif, Tiruchirapalli who gave a declaration that the order of punishment reverting the appellant was illegal. Thereafter, the appellant brought the suit out of which this appeal before us arises for recovery of a sum of Rs. 5,943-01 as arrears of salary. The first two Courts as well as Kailasam, J., have all agreed that the claim was not well-founded.3. The order of reversion was...
S.S. Sundaram Chettiar Vs. Mangai Achi Through Power Agent M.Pr. Chock ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-26-1970
Reported in: (1973)1MLJ160
T. Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. The appellant is the judgment-debtor. The respondent obtained a mortgage decree against the appellant in the year 1962 in O.S. No. 72 of 1961 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Ramanathapuram. The hypotheca is the cinema theatre in Rajapalayam. Admittedly this was valued by the Commissioner appointed by Court at Rs. 2,91,320. In or about 1968 when the theatre was brought to sale pursuant to the mortgage decree the amount due under the decree was about Rs. 2,38,695. On the basis of the value as fixed by the Court, the upset price was also fixed but was reduced from, lime to time as there were no bidders at such auctions purported to be held in execution of the decree. Ultimately, on 12th August, 1969, the upset price was reduced to Rs. 2,25,000 and the properly was also sold for Rs. 2,25,000. On an earlier occasion this Court had to consider whether a sale of this very hypotheca in execution of the above decree for a sum of Rs. 2,100 subject to encumb...
In Re: Navier Marolle
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-25-1970
Reported in: (1970)2MLJ466
R. Sadasivam, J.1. Appellant Navier Marolle has been convicted by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Pondicherry, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for having murdered his brother's daughters, Beatrice aged five years, and Pierette aged five months, by smashing them on the floor, at about 10-30 a.m., on 31st October, 1968, and sentenced to imprisonment for life. The fact that the appellant did cause the death of the two children admits of no doubt and, in fact, it was not disputed by the learned Advocate for the appellant. It is, however, necessary to refer to the evidence about the actual occurrence in this case in order to consider the plea of insanity which has been rejected by the trial Court.2. There is ample evidence in this case to prove that the appellant was insane not only at the time of the occurrence, but also before and after it. He was aged only thirty-five years at the time of the trial. He was employed in the army, but the discharge certificate filed in this ...
N. Pattabiraman Vs. the Accommodation Controller and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-24-1970
Reported in: (1971)2MLJ326
ORDERT. Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. These two writ petitions are connected. The petitioner is the owner of premises No. 33, Office Venkatachala Mudali Street, Triplicane, Madras-5. He is living in the ground floor of the premises and the first floor is in the occupation of the 2nd respondent who is a Government allottee. The portion in the occupation of the 2nd respondent consists of a hall, verandha, kudam, living room, bed room, etc. The petitioner with the intention of demolishing the 1st floor and reconstructing it has sought for permission from the Corporation of Madras to effect such alterations and ultimately obtained sanction therefor under building plan No. P. 2597 of 1970, dated 28th July, 1970. But, as the second respondent was an allottee of the premises through the Government, the petitioner applied to the first respondent for delivery of possession of the same and effectively asked for a release of the first-floor from the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent ...
A. Rangaswamy Naidu Alias A.R. Naidu Vs. B.V. Venkatalakshmi Ammal and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-1970
Reported in: (1971)1MLJ266
G. Ganesan, J.1. The tenant is the petitioner herein and he is aggrieved that the District Judge of Coimbatore, the first revision authority had ordered eviction rejecting his plea that the Rent Controller had no jurisdiction because the lease was of a vacant site and upholding the contention of the landlady that there was default in the payment of rent and that the landlady wanted the suit premises for her own use.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner presses before me the only contention that the lease is of vacant site and that, as such by virtue of the decision of the Supreme Court in A.R. Salay Mohamed Sait v. Jaffar Mohamed Salt's Memorial Dispensary Charity (1969) 1 M.L.J.16 : (1969) 1 n. W.R. 16 : (1969) 1 S.C.J. 63, the proper forum for eviction would be the civil Court, and not the Court of the Rent Controller. I have anxiously gone through the petition and the connected papers and I have come to the conclusion that the lease is only of a vacant site of 50 cents. It is tr...
Haridas Girdhardas and ors. Vs. Varadaraja Pillai and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-17-1970
Reported in: (1971)1MLJ200
K. Veeraswami, C.J.1. The plaintiffs appeal from a decree dismissing their suit for a declaration that they were, as from 1st March, 1964, the owners of the building and superstructures constructed by the first defendant on the lands demised to him by them according to the terms of the lease deed, dated 17th November, 1938, and, if necessary, for directing the 1st defendant to execute and register a deed vesting the buildings and superstructures in. the plaintiffs as from 1st March, 1964. The plaintiffs also claimed rent for the premises as from that date at the rate of Rs. 12,000 per month. By the lease deed of 17th November, 1938, vacant land of an extent of 11-3/4 grounds or (hereabouts, comprised in premises No. 2 and 3/18, Mount Road, Madras, was leased out to the 1st defendant for a period of 15 years and 3 months, from 1st March, 1930, at a rent of Rs. 560 per month, with an option of renewal of the lease for a further term of 10 years from 1st March, 1954, but at an enhanced re...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »