Chennai Court September 1979 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.
Food Corporation of India Represented by the Chairman Vs. Premier Roll ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-14-1979
Reported in: (1980)1MLJ209
T. Ramaprasada Rao, C.J.1. In these four appeals, a common question arises. The appellant is the Food Corporation of India, Madras, represented by its Chairman.2. As an illustration, the facts in S.A. No, 1682 of 1976 arising from O.S. No. 1115 of 1968 on the file of the II Additional District Munsif, Salem could be taken up for consideration.3. The Assistant Director (Food Clearance) Madras Harbour of the Food Corporation of India admits that he has despatched 600 bags of wheat against the allotment made to the respondent under Invoice No. 4 10 in Railway Receipt No. 144,070 dated 7th May, 1965 to the Salem Junction and the Railway receipt was endorsed over to the respondent to enable them to take delivery of the same. The respondent when they took delivery of the consignment at Salem admittedly found 40 bags to be missing and in order to sustain their case, the respondent obtained what is known as partial delivery certificate marked as Exhibit A.8 in this case to prove such short del...
Nagalinga Nadar Vs. K. Mehrunisa Begum and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-13-1979
Reported in: (1980)2MLJ534
V. Ratnam, J.1. The 2nd defendant in O.S. No. 116 of 1973, Sub Court, Vellore, is the appellant in this Appeal. The 1st respondent, figuring as the plaintiff, sued the appellant and the 2nd respondent for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 24,228 on a simple mortgage, dated 17th January, 1966 with subsequent interest or in the alternative for a money decree for a like sum against the 2nd respondent herein. According to the case of the plaintiff, she and the 1st defendant in the suit are related as brother and sister and in a partition suit, regarding the estate of their father, in O.S. No. 99 of 1953, Sub Court, Vellore, the suit property, among other items, was allotted to the share of her brother in 1. A. No. 1313 of 1954 in O.S. No. 99 of 1953. Having thus obtained the property, the 1st defendant, according to the plaintiff borrowed a sum of Rs. 13,000 on the security of the suit property and executed a registered mortgage deed dated 17th January, 1966. The consideration of Rs. 13,000 was...
Varalakshmi Sundar and ors. Vs. Meeran and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-12-1979
Reported in: (1980)2MLJ106
ORDERV. Ratnam, J.1. In Transfer C.M.P. No. 7753 of 1978, the petitioners seek the transfer of M.O.P. No. 105 of 1976 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Chingleput to the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Madras. The accident which had given rise to the claim for compensation took place on 5th May, 1976 in the Grand Southern Trunk Road, Alandur, Chingleput District. The claim has been properly preferred before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Chingleput, having regard to the place of accident. The ground on which the transfer is sought for is that the petitioners are put up at Alwarpet in Madras and the witnesses who have to be examined in connection with the claim for compensation, now pending before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Chingleput are also in Madras and therefore, it will be difficult for the petitioners and the witnesses to attend the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Chingleput and that if the proceedings are transferred to Mad...
L. Narayanaswami Vs. T. Kanagarathinam
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-10-1979
Reported in: (1980)1MLJ238
V. Sethuraman, J.1. The second defendant in O.S. No. 209 of 1974 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Cuddalore is the appellant. The plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 29,301 said to be due on two promissory notes dated 15th April, 1971 and 3rd July, 1971, respectively executed for Rs. 13,001 and Rs. 15,000 carrying interest at 12 per cent. per annum. The said promissory notes were executed in favour of one Nataraja Gramani who assigned them for collection to the plaintiff on 12th March, 1974. The plaintiff is an Advocate practising in Cuddalore. He claimed that there was an endorsement of payment of Rs. 300 on 27th September, 1971 on the promissory note dated 3rd July. 1971, marked as Exhibit A. 2. He claimed to have issued a notice subsequent to the assignment in his favour and as there was no reply, he filed the present suit. The first defendant remained ex parte. The second defendant contended that the promissory notes had been concocted with the aid of printe...
Rajammal Vs. Lakshmi and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-10-1979
Reported in: (1980)1MLJ450
V. Ratnam, J.1. The second defendant, who lost in the Courts below, is the appellant in this second appeal, which arises out of a suit instituted by the respondents herein, for a declaration that they are entitled to the western portion of the suit property delineated M, N, O, P in the plaint sketch and also for the consequential relief of restraining the appellant from in any way interfering with the respondent's possession and enjoyment of the said property and also for recovery of possession of the portion marked A, B, C, D in the plaint sketch from the appellant.2. According to the respondents the suit property which is a house in Paramakudi belonged to one Alagu Chettiar. Alagu Chettiar died leaving behind him, two sons, Vellaichami Chettiar and Chellam Chettiar. The first son Vellaichami Chettiar had two wives and through his first wife, he had a son by name Krishnan Chettiar and through his second wife, Meenakshi, he had another son of the name of Nataraja. Vellaichami Chettiar ...
Venkatalakshmi Ammal and anr. Vs. Narayani Ammal and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-07-1979
Reported in: (1980)2MLJ566
G. Ramanujam, J.1. Since all the three second appeals are connected they are disposed of together. S.A. No. 1760 of 1976 arises out of O.S. No. 293 of 1973 on the file of the District Munsif, Ami, which was filed by Venkatalakshmi Ammal and Vijayaraghavan Pillai for ejectment. S.A. Nos. 1761 and 1762 of 1976 arise out of two suits, O.S. No. 130 of 1974 and O.S. No. 542 of 1972, filed by one Narayani Ammal, who is the widow of the lessee of a plot of land, portions of which are subject-matters in all the three suits. Before referring to the rival claims put forward by the parties in the said three suits, it is necessary to set out certain facts which gave rise to the disputes between the parties.2. One Annamalai Pillai, the predecessor-in-interest of the appellants in S.A. No. 1760 of 1976 owned an extent of 1 acre, 7 cents in S. No. 321/l and 1 acre in S No. 319. On 19th January, 1940 under Exhibit A. 2 he leased out 80 cents in S. No 321 and 70 cents in S. No. 319 to the husband of Na...
Dr. G. Srihari Vs. the Madras Dock Labour Board by Its Chairman and an ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-06-1979
Reported in: (1980)1MLJ268
S. Natarajan, J.1. This appeal is directed against the dismissal of the appellant's writ petition wherein he sought for the issue of writ of certiorari mandamus for quashing the order of the second respondent refusing to disturb the order of dismissal passed by the first respondent and for directing the first respondent to reinstate the appellant in its service and provide back wages and other benefits to him.2. Consequent upon the extension of medical benefits to the members of the Families of the workers employed in the Dock Labour Board two posts of Assistant Surgeons were created. The appellant was appointed to one of the two posts and for the other post one Smt. Holon C. Kumar was appointed by the Chairman of the Board by proceedings dated 28th March, 1968. The posts carried a basic salary of Rs. 325 per mensem and allowance under various heads, amounting to Rs. 776, and the post was in the scale of Rs. 325-25-500-EB-30-590.EB-30-800 plus a non-practising allowance of 25 per cent,...
Somasundara Nadar (Died) and ors. Vs. Bhusekarapandian
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-06-1979
Reported in: (1980)1MLJ136
T. Ramaprasada Rao, C.J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment and decree in O.S. No. 38 of 1973 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Kumbakonam. The defendants in the above suit are the appellants. The first defendant is the father of the plaintiff and defendants 2 and 3 are the elder brothers of the plaintiff. Claiming that the properties described by him in the plaint are joint family properties and were treated as such by all the members of the family, the plaintiff filed the suit for partition of his one-fourth share in the suit properties and himself being put in possession thereof after effecting division by metes and bounds. The defence was that all the properties are not joint family properties and the various claims put forward by the plaintiff as regard the properties, which were admittedly non joint family properties, were denied. During the course of trial, the parties filed a memo. and in particular, an interlocutory application I.A. No. 278 of 1974 was...
Karunai Ammal Vs. Karuppa Gounder and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-05-1979
Reported in: (1980)1MLJ432
S. Mohan, J.1. The plaintiff, who could not succeed in either of the Courts below in her suit for partition and separate possession of her one-fourth share in the C Schedule properties, has preferred this second appeal.The facts are as under: One Rayappa Gounder had two daughters, Palaniammal and Nanjakkal. The husband of Palaniammal was one Rangappa Goundar while Nanjakkal was married to one Rama Goundar. Rayappa and another Rama Goundar owned the properties described in A Schedule to the plaint, of an extent of 8 acres 77 cents spread over in S.F. Nos. 479, 480 and 482. Rayappa was in possession of the eastern half which had been described as B Schedule. By a registered settlement deed dated 26th January, 1910 (Exhibit A-1) the B Schedule properties came to be settled in favour of the daughters, Palaniammal and Nanjakkal and their respective husbands. Subsequently, by a sale deed, Exhibit A-2 dated 5th August, 1913 Rangappa, the husband of Palaniammal, purchased the interests of Nanj...
S.M.O. Uthaman Chettiar Vs. R.M. Nachappa Chettiar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-05-1979
Reported in: (1981)1MLJ200
ORDERP. Venugopal, J.1. Plaintiff is the appellant. Defendants 2 to 4, the legal representatives of the deceased first defendant are the respondents before this Court. The plaintiff filed a suit, O. S. No. 50 of 1965 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Devakottai, against the first defendant and obtained a money decree for a sum of Rs. 13,967-16 together with subsequent interest en Rs. 12,000 at 6 per cent per annum from the date of plaint till the date of realisation and proportionate costs. The first defendant admitted his liability to the extent of Rs. 8,486-49 and preferred an appeal before the High Court in respect of the rest of the decree amount. While the appeal was pending before this Court, the first defendant filed C. M. P. No 6617 of 1967 and obtained interim stay of execution of the decree. The plaintiff filed an application in C. M. P. No 8513 of 1967 to vacate the stay granted in favour of the defendant, On 19th July, 1967, this Court took up both the peti...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »