Chennai Court October 1976 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.
R. Manickam and ors. Vs. the Union Territory of Pondicherry, Represent ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-18-1976
Reported in: (1978)1MLJ28
ORDERS. Mohan, J.1. All these three writ petitions can be conveniently dealt with under a common judgment. It would be sufficient to note the facts in W.P. No. 6480 of 1975 alone, since the same question of law arises in all these cases.2. The Government of Pondicherry issued a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act of 1894 (here in after referred to as the Act) for acquiring certain lands in Korkadu village for the purpose of providing house-sites for Harijans. The said notification included the petitioner's lands. The notification is on the date, 9th of April, 1974. The petitioner filed the objections for the statutory enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. Those objections were overruled and Section 6 declaration was issued in G.O. Ms. No. 28, dated 16th July, 1975. It was published in the Gazette of the Government of Pondicherry on 29th July, 1975. The petitioners were served with the notice under Sections 9 and 10 of the Act. On a request made by the petitioner...
Muthu Krishna Naidu and ors. Vs. T.M. Thamothara Chowdary and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-18-1976
Reported in: (1978)1MLJ351
V. Ramaswami, J.1. Defendants 3 and 7 to 14 are the appellants. The suit was filed by respondents 1 and 2 for a permanent injunction restraining defendants 1 to 3 and 7 to 14 from interfering with the plaintiffs' peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule properties as long as they are the lessees and cultivating tenants in respect thereof. The suit properties originally belonged to defendants 1 and 2. They leased the properties in favour of one Mahadeva Naidu, the father and the husband of respondents 1 and 2 respectively. Subsequent to the death of Mahadeva Naidu on 30th June, 1968, the plaintiffs | respondents 1 and 2 claimed that as the legal representatives of the said Mahadeva Naidu, they are the lessees and that they are also cultivating tenants entitled to protection under the Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants' Protection Act. It appears that on 27th July, 1968 the properties were sold by the first and second defendants in favour of the third defendant. Defendants 7 ...
Sreepathi Hosiery Mills (P) Ltd., Calcutta and anr. Vs. Chitra Knittin ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-15-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Mad258
ORDER1. In spite of S. 19, C.P.C., the Court below was wrong in having entertained the action on the foot that it had jurisdiction to do so. The short facts leading to the present action are as follows. The defendants who were admittedly resident of Calcutta gave a complaint against the goods manufactured by the plaintiff and sent to Bombay for sale and consumption. It is not in dispute that consequent upon such a complaint preferred by the out-of-the State residents the Bombay police took action and seized the plaintiff's goods. The case of the plaintiff was that the defendants misled the police to believe that the consignment of banians and hosieries sent by him from Tiruppur to Bombay bore false name or false mark. He therefore came forward with a suit for damages for loss of reputation and business and filed the action limiting the quantum of damages so as to bring it within the pecuniary jurisdiction of the court of the District Munsif of Tiruppur. The defendants inter alia conten...
Sreepathi Hosiery Mills (P.) Ltd., and anr. Vs. Chitra Knitting Compan ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-15-1976
Reported in: (1977)1MLJ222
ORDERT. Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. In spite of Section 19 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the Court below was wrong in having entertained the action on the foot that it had jurisdiction to do so. The short facts leading to the present action are as follows. The defendants who were admittedly residents of Calcuttagave a complaint against the goods manufactured by the plaintiff and sent to Bombay for sale and consumption. It is not in dispute that consequent upon such a complaint preferred by the out-of-the State-residents the Bombay police took action and seized the plaintiff's goods. The case of the plaintiff was the defendants; misled the police to believe that the consignment of banians and hosieries sent by him from Tiruppur to Bombay bore false name or false mark. He therefore came forward with a suit for damages for loss of reputation and business and filed the-action limiting the quantum of damages, so as to being it within the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Court of the District Munsi...
Rajammal Vs. Janaki Ammal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-15-1976
Reported in: (1977)1MLJ264
ORDERG. Ramanujam, J.1. The first defendant in O.S. No. 299 of 1958 on the file of the Court of the District Munsif of Pudukottai is the appellant. One Venu Ammal had executed a mortgage on 2nd September, 1945 in favour of one Krishnamurthi, whose legal representative, is the first respondent. After the death of Venu Ammal the first respondent filed a suit on the said mortgage against the daughters of the said Venu Ammal, for recovery of the mortgage amount. Defendants 1 and 2, the daughters of the mortgagor, remained ex parte and a final decree in the suit was passed on 6th January, 1972 for a sum of Rs. 1,947. After the passing of the said final decree, the first defendant, one of the daughters filed ah application I.A. No. 1369 of 1974 in the said suit seeking an amendment of the decree on the ground that she is entitled to the benefits of the Tamil Nadu Act (IV of 1938 as amended by the Act VIII of 1973). The said application was resisted by the first respondent, decree-holder, con...
Miss Sathya Rao (Minor, Represented by Father and Guardian U.N.R. Rao) ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-15-1976
Reported in: (1977)2MLJ403
M.M. Ismail, J.1. This batch of writ petitions raises a common question concerning the eligibility of the petitioners for admission to the Pre-University Course of the Madras University, hereinafter called, the University in the approved Colleges of that University. The writ petitions themselves came up for hearing before Mohan, J., but the learned Judge took the view that, having regard to the importance of the matter and the fact that in any event the judgment rendered by him would be taken up in appeal by either of the parties, it was a fit case which must be decided by a division Bench of this Court. Hence the matter has come before us.2. The pattern of education that is prevalent in this State just now is 11 years school course followed by one year Pre-University Course and three years Degree course. For sometime past, there had been a desire to change this pattern into 10 plus 2 plus 3 years course, the later three years being the Degree course in the University. This pattern had...
K. Daniel Nadar and ors. Vs. R. Ananthan Pillai and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-15-1976
Reported in: (1978)1MLJ125
A.Varadarajan, J.1. The legal representatives of the plaintiff K. Daniel Nadar, who failed in both the Courts below are the appellants. Daniel Nadar filed the suit for partition and separate possession of 2 acres of land out of the suit property which is 13.12 acres in S. No. 3020-A of Ponmanai village, Kalkulam taluk. The allegation in the plaint was that one half of Survey N . 3020-A, the total extent whereof is 26 acres and 30 cents belonged to one Dr. John Hilkiah, who had been impleaded as the second plaintiff and legal representative of the first plaintiff in O.S. No. 293 of 1120 H.F. which was filed by the deceased first plaintiff Nakshatram Abaranam of C lachal Paguthi for partition of a half share, impleading the plaintiff Daniel Nadar as the 10th defendant. The other half share belonged according to the first plaintiff Nakshatram Abaranam to defendants 1 and 2-Ananthan Pillai and Velayudhan Pillai respectively and their maternal uncle Raman Pillai and they became divided as p...
The State Wakf Board, Madras by Its Secretary at No. 3 Vs. Ibrahim Sah ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-14-1976
Reported in: (1977)1MLJ324
V. Ramaswami, J.1. The plaintiff is the appellant. The suit was filed for possession of the suit property which is a land bearing S. No. 104/12 and T.D.No.33 of Sendamangalam Village. It appears that on the basis of a pro forma report sent by the Assistant Commissioner of Wakf, Salem, the suit property was notified s a Wakf under section 5 (2) of the Wakf Act on 29th April, 1959. Finding that the defendants are now in possession and resisting the plaintiff setting up title in themselves, the suit was filed for possession. The defendants contended that the suit property was never a wakf property, that it was a personal inam and that the defendants had purchased the property under Exhibits B-1 and B-2 from the pre-decessors-in-title and that they and their predecessors-in-title had been in possession and enjoyment for a long number of years. It was also stated that the property is part of a minor inam which was notified under Madras Act XXX of 1963 and during the settlement proceedings t...
Poomalai Vs. Ramalingam
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-14-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Mad411; (1977)1MLJ494
1. This appeal is directed against the decision of the lower appellate court awarding a damage of Rs. 750 in an application under S. 47, C.P.C. and reversing the order of the trial Court rejecting the respondent's claim.2. The appellant herein executed a sale deed in favour of the respondent in relation to certain house property on 7-7-1967. However, he refused to register the sale deed. Therefore, the respondent had the sale deed compulsorily registered on 18-10-1967. Thereafter to recover possession of the property from the appellant, the respondent filed O. S. No. 121 of 1969 which was one for declaration of his title to the property and for recovery of possession of the same. The said suit was resisted by the appellant but it was ultimately decreed on 10-11-1970. At the time of the passing of the decree the appellant was granted four months' time for putting the respondent in possession of the property. Since possession was not given within the said period of four months, the respo...
State Vs. Ramados Naidu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-13-1976
Reported in: 1977CriLJ2048
Natarajan, J.1. These four appeals have been preferred by the State against the acquittal of the respective accused in C. C. 18 to 21 of 1973, on the file of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Villupuram. Since the facts in each of the cases are more or less the same and since common questions of law are involved, all the four appeals are disposed of by a common judgment.2. The facts in C. As. 332 and 335 of 1974, are some what alike, while the facts in C. As. 333 and 334 of 1974 are similar in character.3. The Land Development Bank in Gingee introduced a scheme for disbursement of loans to agriculturists for the , purpose of digging new wells or for the purchase of new oil engines. A ryot wishing to avail the loan facility had to make an application to the Bank and had also to produce a certificate from the village karnam a'bout the extent of the land owned by him and its approximate value.Whenever a loan was sanctioned, the applicant has also to execute a mortgage deed and give property ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »