Privy Council Court April 1939 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.
Douglas George Wright and Another Vs. New Zealand Farmers Co-operative ...
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Apr-27-1939
Lord Russell of Killowen: This appeal was brought by the plaintiffs in an action against the New Zealand Farmers Co-operative Association of Canterbury, Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Association) from a judgment of the Court of Appeal of New Zealand which affirmed the judgment of the trial Judge, by which judgment was entered for the defendants in the action, and judgment was entered for the defendants on a counter-claim by them for, (amongst other relief) a sum of 13,384 13s 9d. Two questions only were argued before their Lordships' Board; they are unconnected, and may be dealt with separately. The relevant facts upon which the first question is founded may first be stated. In July 1928, the plaintiff Wright owned a farm called "Cattle Peaks," which was subject to a first mortgage for 9425. By memorandum of mortgage dated 27th July 1928, the plaintiff Wright mortgaged "Cattle Peaks" to the Association, subject to the beforementioned mortgage. By virtue of the Land Transfer A...
Sir Hari Shankar Paul and Another Vs. Kedar Nath Saha and Others
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Apr-25-1939
Lord Macmillan: The plaintiffs in this suit, now the appellants, seek to enforce a mortgage for the principal sum of Rs.25,000 with arrears of interest accrued. Their case is that the mortgage was effected by the delivery to them of the documents of title to certain immovable property in Calcutta with intent to create a security thereon. The general law in India under the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, is that a mortgage for a principal sum of Rs.100 or upwards can be effected only by a registered instrument duly signed and attested, but the validity of mortgages by deposit of title deeds in Calcutta and certain other places is expressly recognized and saved, doubtless because of the convenience of this form of security in commercial centres: see S.59 of the Act as it stood at the date of the transaction with which this case is concerned, and now, by amendment, S.58 (f). That the title deeds of the property were deposited by the respondents with the appellants is not disputed, but the...
Ram NaraIn Sahu and Another Vs. Mt. Makhna
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Apr-20-1939
Sir George Rankin: (For pedigree see next page.) The sole question in this case is whether at the date of his death (5th August 1927), Deo Narain was separate in estate from all the other members of his family; or whether he was joint with the plaintiffs-appellants, viz. his brother Ram Narain and Lachmi Narain, the latter's son. If he died a separated Hindu, then, as he left no son, his widow Mt. Makhna (defendant-respondent) became heir to his property : if at the time of his death he was a member of a joint Hindu family his interest passed by survivorship to his coparceners. Both Courts in India have held in favour of the widow that he died separate. In 1923 the family was joint. Four sons of Rameshar were alive and on 26th March 1923, two of them, Ram Das and Parsotam (together with the latter's minor son) sued the other members of the family for partition, asking for allotment and separate possession of a one-half share. At that time and at all material times Deo Narain was a luna...
C.P. Matthen and Others Vs. District Magistrate, Trivandrum and Anothe ...
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Apr-03-1939
Lord Thankerton: This is an appeal from (1) a judgment of the Full Bench of the High Court of Madras, dated 4th November 1938, in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 1003 of 1938, which on a reference by a Division Bench of the same Court, held that the orders of Pandrang Row J., a single Judge of the Court, on an application for writ of habeas corpus and relative applications, and dated 21st, 24th and 26th October 1938, made in Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions Nos. 986, 990 and 985 of 1938 respectively, were null and void, (2) a judgment and order of the said Division Bench, dated 7th November 1938, made in petition No, 1003 in implement of the above judgment, and (3) a judgment and order of the said Division Bench, dated 7th November 1938, made in petition No. 985, dismissing the application for a writ of habeas corpus. The appellants challenge the validity of certain warrants issued by the Resident for the Madras States under S. 7, Indian Extradition Act (15 of 1903), to the Chief P...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›