Chennai Court May 1972 Judgments
In Re: Marappa Gounder
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-26-1972
Reported in: 1973CriLJ1044
Mudaliyar, J.1. Marappa Gounder (Accused-appellant) seeks to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Session of Coimbatore (East) Division at Erode, convicting him of the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to death.2. The accusation against the accused is that he murdered his elder brother, Muthusami Gounder, by stabbing him with a Kutheetti at about 5-30 P.M. on 3-10-1971 at Karunkarattu thottam in Kanak-kampalayam village.3. P.W. 1 is the elder brother of frse accused and the deceased Muthusami Gounder. P.W. 3 is the father-in-law of Muthusami Gounder (deceased), P.W. 2 is the younger brother of P.W. 3. P.W. 8 is the wife of Muthusami Gounder (deceased). P.W. 9 is the son of the deceased.4. Marappa Gounder (accused) and Muthusami Gounder (deceased) were brothers. They lived in Karunkarattu thottam in Kanakkampalaya village separately in two different but adjoining houses. They enjoyed the lands in that thottam separately by taking water in turns fr...
Tag this Judgment!Far East Steamship Line, Vs. the Union of India
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-10-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Mad169
1. The question in this Civil Revision Petition is whether the Union of India should be compelled to have recourse to the Russian Courts in view of the foreign jurisdiction clause in the contract entered into between the Union and the petitioners, Far East Steamship Line, Vladivastrk, Black Sea Steamship Line, Odessa, for 1,60,000 bags of urea from Japan. The contract was with the first of them, represented by the second, for the carriage of goods along with 1,600 spare bags. It was a Russian ship which when called at the Nsgapattinam port, made a short delivery, the value of which is said to be in the region of Rs. 4,270-55, excluding the proportionate freight of Rs. 332-05. Including the freight, insurance charges, survey charges, etc., the total claim for short delivery was R". 4,792-62. The Union brought the suit in the Court of the District Munsif of Nagapattinam. The suit was resisted by the Russian Shipping Company on ground, inter alia, that the foreign jurisdiction clause in t...
Tag this Judgment!Rajabu Fathima Buhari and anr. Vs. S.V. Ramakrishna Mudaliar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-10-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Mad70
Raghavan, J.1. The above two appeals are preferred by the first and second defendants against the decree in C. S. No. 43 of 1962. The question that arises for consideration in these appeals is whether there can be a contract of honour or what is familiarly known as a gentleman's agreement which is not enforceable in a court of law based on the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Rose and Frank Co. v. J. R. Crompton and Bros. Ltd., 1924 All ER 245.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. The plaintiffs are father and son and the defendants are wife and husband. The first plaintiff, the father, is the owner of 3 items of properties described in Schedules A and B to the plaint which among others were bequeathed to him by his adoptive father late S. V. Ramaswami Mudaliar subject to other dispositions under his last will and testament dated 10-9-1937 which was duly probated. The A Schedule property consists of (1) House and ground bearing door No. 46 in Rattan Bazar Road and (2) Hou...
Tag this Judgment!Far East Steamship Line, Vladivastok U.S.S.R. and ors. Vs. the Union o ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-10-1972
Reported in: (1972)2MLJ578
ORDERK. Veeraswami, C.J.1. The question in this Civil Revision Petition is whether the Union of India should be compelled to have recourse to the Russian Courts in view of the foreign jurisdiction clause in the contract entered into between the Union and the petitioners, Far East Steamship Line, Vladivastrk, Black Sea Steamship Line, Odessa, for 1,60,000 bags of urea from Japan. The contract was with the first of them, represented by the second, for the carriage of goods along with 1,600 spare bags. It was a Russian ship which when called at the Nsgapattinam port, made a short delivery, the value of which is said to be in the region of Rs. 4,270-55, excluding the proportionate freight of Rs. 332-05. Including the freight, insurance charges, survey charges, etc., the total claim for short delivery was R'. 4,792-62. The Union brought the suit in the Court of the District Munsif of Nagapattinam. The suit was resisted by the Russian Shipping Company on ground, inter alia, that the foreign ...
Tag this Judgment!Govindaraj Vs. Uthirapathi and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-05-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Mad286
ORDER1. Thiru Govindaraj the petitioner seeks to challenge the validity of the order passed by the Panchayat Election Tribunal, Mannargudi dismissing O. P. No. 14 of 1970 filed by him under Section 2(1) of Notification 10 of the Madras Panchayats Act to set aside the election of the first respondent Thiru Uthirapathi after recounting the votes and to declare him (revision petitioner) as the successful candidate in the Panchayat Board President Election held on 31-7-1970.2. On counting the votes the Chief Presiding Officer held that, out of 1408 votes polled, the petitioner secured 515 votes, the first respondent 523 votes and the second respondent 299 votes; and 71 votes were declared invalid. Various allegations were made in support of the application for setting aside the election of the first respondent; but the only point now pressed in the course of arguments is that the Panchayat Election Tribunal, was wrong in rejecting the petitioner's request for a scrutiny of 71 votes declare...
Tag this Judgment!Sakuntala Rajappa Vs. K. Kamala
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-05-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Mad325
ORDER1. Mrs. K. Kamala, the tenant-respondent herein filed an application, HRC No. 2067 of 1969, out of which this civil revision petition arises against Mrs. Sakuntala Rajappa, the petitioner herein, under Section 8(5) of the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (18 of 1960), before the Rent Controller for permission for depositing into the tribunal the rents for two months at the rate of Rs. 175 per month in respect of the premises demised viz, the building bearing door No. 164-C Llyods Road, Madras; and it was contended by the respondent that the monthly rental was Rs. 175 only, that the electricity and water charges, which she had agreed to bear separately, did not form part of the monthly rent stipulated, that as the petitioner would not give regular supply of water from 1-5-1969, the respondent had made alternative arrangements and was not liable to pay water charges any more and that, as the petitioner refused to receive the rent of Rs. 175, the respondent was entitled ...
Tag this Judgment!Arjuna Goundar and anr. Vs. Pillaiyar Goundar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-05-1972
Reported in: (1972)2MLJ462
ORDERS. Ganesan, J.1. Pillaiyar Goundar, the respondent in both these Civil Revision Petitions, had instituted two suits, the first one O.S. No. 397 of 1971 against Arjurva Goundar, the petitioner in C.R.P. No. 1984 of 1971 on a promissory note for Rs. 700 executed by the latter in favour of his elder brother Govindaraja after taking an assignment from Govindaraja and the second O.S. No. 398 of 1971 against Kista Goundar, the petitioner in C.R.P. No. 1985 of 1971 on a promissory note for Rs. 650 executed by the latter in favour of his elder brother Govindaraja after taking an assignment of the promissory note as in the other case.2. The petitioners contended that the promissory notes were not supported by consideration. According to the petitioners, the promissory notes were taken by their brother Govindaraja in consideration of each of them agreeing to discharge some debts in the family and as the debts are found not to be true, the promissory notes are devoid of consideration and are...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›