Privy Council Court November 1949 Judgments

Manaka and Others Vs. Madharao and Others

Court: Privy Council

Reported in: AIR1950PC25

SIR LIONEL LEACH: This is an appeal from a decree of the High Court of Judicature at Nagpur allowing an appeal from a decree of the Additional Judge of Chanda. The appeal has arisen out of a suit filed by Arjuna (the husband of appellant 1 and the father of appellants 2, 3 and 4) and appellants 5, 6 and 7 (the brothers of Arjuna) to enforce payment of the sum of Rs. 12,553.0.3, claimed to be due on a mortgage executed in their favour by Mt. Bajabai, her son Saoji (father of respondent 1 and the husband of respondents 2 and 3), and respondents 4 and 6 (Saoji's brothers) and on behalf of certain minors. Arjuna, Bajabai and Saoji have died during the course of the litigation. The Additional District Judge held that the minor defendants had no interest in the property mortgaged and this finding has not been challenged. Consequently, they have not been made parties to the appeal. 2. The respondents' case is that in the month of December 1934, the mortgagees agreed to accept the sum of Rs. 9...

Lumbhardar Zutshi and Another Vs. the King

Court: Privy Council

LORD REID: On 19th June 1946, the appellants were convicted and sentenced by the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Bombay. The charge against appellant 1 was that he, being a public servant, accepted a sum of Rs. 15,000 for forbearing to prosecute a metal merchant named Vakharia and thereby committed an offence punishable under S. 161, Penal Code. Appellant 2 was charged with abetting that offence. An appeal by appellant 1 to the High Court at Bombay was dismissed on 20th March 1947. It appears from the judgment of Stone, C. J., that there were two grounds of appeal: first that the whole proceedings were invalid because no sanction had been given under S. 197, Criminal P. C., and secondly an appeal on the facts. Appellant 2 did not appeal to the High Court, but notice of enhancement of sentence was given to him and his sentence was increased on 20th March 1947. 2. On 21st April 1947, a petition for special leave to appeal was lodged by appellant 1. In this petition no reference was made to ...

The Governor-general in Council Vs. Constance Zena Wells

Court: Privy Council

LORD MACDERMOTT: The suit out of which this appeal arises was brought in forma pauperis by the respondent against the appellant under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855, for damages for the death of her husband, Ronald Duncan Wells. He had died on 14th December 1937, as the result of injuries received a few days earlier when the engine on which he was serving as a fireman in the employment of the North Western Railway was involved in a collision within the limits of the railway station at Mirpur Mathelo. The respondent alleged that the collision was caused by the negligence of the Railway's employees and claimed on behalf of her two children and herself. At the date of the accident the North Western Railway was owned by the Government of India and administered by the Secretary of State for India in Council acting through the North Western (State) Railway Administration. The deceased was then serving on the Railway pursuant to a contract of service made by him with the Secretary of State on ...

Zakka Pattalhirami Reddi Vs. Menakur Balarami Reddi and Others

Court: Privy Council

Reported in: AIR1950PC48

LORD MACDERMOTT: This appeal is by special leave from a judgment and decree of the High Court at Madras, dated 6th September 1944, affirming a judgment and decree of the Court of the District Judge at Nellore, dated 28th November 1942, which varied a judgment and decree of the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Nellore, dated 30th August 1940. 2. The present respondents are the representatives of the plaintiffs who brought the suit in which these judgments and decrees were pronounced, the appellant being the first-named and principal defendant therein. 3. Before referring to the nature and history of this litigation it will be convenient to indicate, in chronological order as far as possible, the events and circumstances out of which it arose. 4. Many years ago, the village of Jonnavada was granted as an endowment to two temple deities. In 1860 the Inam Commission confirmed the grant and the Government granted a title-deed in the following year. In 1924 the Court of the Subordinate Judg...

Misri Lal Nayak Vs. Mt. Surji and Others

Court: Privy Council

Reported in: AIR1950PC28

SIR JOHN BEAUMONT : This is an appeal by special leave from a judgment and decree of the High Court of Judicature at Patna dated 15th May 1946, reversing in second appeal the judgment and decree in first appeal of the Additional Subordinate Judge of Darbhanga dated 24th August 1943, and dismissing the appellant's suit 2. The contention of the appellant is that the learned Judge who heard the second appeal in the High Court reversed decisions of fact arrived at by the lower Appellate Court, and that in so doing he acted contrary to the provisions of S. 100, Civil P. C. It is settled law that in view of that section a High Court has no power in second appeal to question findings of fact reached by the first Appellate Court which there was evidence to support. 3. The property in suit originally belonged to one Bihari Paswan, who, on 24th February 1908, by a sale deed, Ex. A, sold the property to Mukh Lal. The deed provided that part of the purchase money should be applied in remitting a ...

C.S. Nataraja Pillai (Now Deceased) and Another Vs. C.S. Subbaraya Che ...

Court: Privy Council

LORD GREENE: This is a re-hearing of an appeal by the appellants from a decree dated 15th November 1938, of the High Court of Madras in its appellate civil jurisdiction dismissing the appellants' appeal from a decree dated 1st December 1936, of the High Court in its original civil jurisdiction. The present appeal was dismissed by Order in Council dated 22nd June 1948, which gave effect to the humble advice given in the judgment of the Board delivered on 17th June 1948. Reported in AIR (36) 1949 PC 48. The appellants subsequently presented a petition asking that the Order in Council should be recalled and leave be granted for the appeal to be reheard, alleging in support of the petition that their Lordships in coming to their conclusions had been misled with regard to a certain matter to which reference will presently be made. The prayer of the petition was granted and this re-hearing was ordered. 2. In the suit out of which the appeal arises the respondent (plaintiff) obtained a declar...

N. Subramania, Pillai Vs. A. Draviyasundaram Pillai

Court: Privy Council

SIR JOHN BEAUMONT: This is an appeal from a judgment and decree of the High Court of Judicature at Madras dated 24th January 1945, reversing a decree dated 25th August 1943, of the District Judge of Tinnevelly which affirmed a judgment and decree dated 26th September 1942, of the Subordinate Judge of Tuticorin. 2. On 29th April 1934, one Kanakasabapathi Pillai (hereinafter called "the testator"), made a will whereby he appointed the appellant and the respondent executors to carry out the trusts of the will. 3. The testator was murdered on 13th August 1940, and disputes at once arose between the appellant, who was his nephew and heir, and the respondent, who was the brother of his second wife, as to the effect and validity of the will. 4. On 31st October 1940, the respondent filed the suit out of which this appeal arises in the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Tuticorin, against the appellant to recover possession of the properties set out in Schs. 1 to 4 and 6 of the plaint. Of the ma...

Suka Vs. the King

Court: Privy Council

Reported in: AIR1950PC72

LORD SIMONDS: This appeal is brought by special leave from a judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Nagpur dismissing the appellant's appeal from the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge Bhandara, dated 30th January 1948, whereby the appellant was convicted of murder under S. 302, Penal Code and confirming the sentence of death passed upon him. 2. The grounds of appeal are stated to be ''(a) that there was no ground upon which the trial Court was entitled to find the appellant guilty of any offence, and (b) that both the learned trial Judge and the learned Judges of the High Court arrived at their findings by indulging in a series of surmises which were unsupported by evidence." and it was no doubt upon the footing that a review of the evidence adduced at the trial might justify these conclusions, that leave to appeal was given. 3. Their Lordships have therefore with the assistance of counsel scrutinised with particular care the whole of the evidence and the judgmen...

Sudarsan Das Vs. Ram Kirpal Das and Others

Court: Privy Council

Reported in: AIR1950PC44

LORD RADCLIFFE: These are two appeals from the High Court of Judicature at Patna. They have been consolidated, and the central point upon which each appeal turns is the same: which of the parties is to be treated as the lawful owner of the piece of property in dispute That piece of property is a four annas undivided share out of a fourteen annas partitioned share of an estate called Touzi no. 7893 in Mouza Awari, Pargana Lautan. District Darbhanga, and it is hereinafter referred to as "the disputed property." 2. The two suits out of which the appeals arise were respectively a partition Suit (No. 89 of 1933) filed by the appellant on 16th September 1932, and a Title suit (No. 72 of 1933) filed by the respondents in the second appeal on 7th November 1933. The appellant, who is the Mahanth of a Math or Asthal called the Birpur Asthal, sought by the partition suit to obtain a declaration of his title to the disputed property and an order for partition of the lands of which that property wa...

Tiruchendur Sri Subramaniaswamstemple Vs. P. Ramaswamia, Pillai and Ot ...

Court: Privy Council

SIR LIONEL LEACH: The appellant is the idol of a Hindu temple at Kasba Tiruchendur in the Province of Madras. The appeal arises out of a suit brought in the name of the idol by the trustee of the temple in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Tuticorin for a decree for possession of properties which had formed the estate of one Minakshisundaram Pillai, who died on 21st May 1919. The appellant claimed to 6ft entitled to the estate under a will executed by the deceased. The Subordinate Judge construed the will against the appellant and his decision was upheld by the High Court of Madras. The appeal is from the decree of the High Court. 2. The will of the testator is dated 20th May 1919, and reads as follows : "I am now an in-patient in the hospital at Madura, having undergone an operation for carbuncle. As I have suspicions about my surviving, I have bequeathed to my son, Picha Pillai the right to all my properties and moneys, etc., and he shall solely enjoy them. If he or his son has n...