Air 1941 Mad 4 - Judgment Search Results
S. Ramasubba Iyer and anr. Vs. Ayyalu Naidu and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-10-1941
Reported in: AIR1941Mad493
several cases of which Chidambaranatha Thambiran v. Nallasiva Mudaliar A.I.R. 1918 Mad. 464 which was also cited by the appellants, is an interesting example because … Court, because no decision of any other High Court has rendered me any assistance. Vallabhacharyulu v. Rangacharyulu : AIR1937Mad449 was a suit by reversioners for a declaration that a decree obtained against the widow of the last … are asking that the decree passed in previous suit should be declared to be not binding. They have made in this suit both the temple and the trustee himself parties. In my view, the position of the
Velayudham Subbaya Nadar Vs. Kalamsetti Anjaneyalu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-30-1940
Reported in: AIR1941Mad49
disputed that an application under Order 44, Rule 1, Civil P.C., is a judicial proceeding and the order made therein should be based upon the exercise of a judicial discretion exercised on a proper consideration of the … the legality of this procedure is challenged before me. It is not disputed that an application under Order 44, Rule 1, Civil P.C., is a judicial proceeding and the order made therein should be based upon the
A. Sabhapathi Mudaliar Vs. Rajarathna Mudaliar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-16-1940
Reported in: AIR1941Mad495
the matter is covered by our previous decision reported in Varadarajan Pillai v. Krishnamurthi Pillai ) A.I.R. 28 1941 Mad. 321. In the result therefore the appeal treated as a civil revision petition is dismissed with costs. - … Wadsworth, J.1. This civil miscellaneous appeal is preferred against a decision under Section 19 of Madras Act, 4 of 1938. We have been asked to treat the appeal as a civil revision petition and it has
18-section briefs on any result in this list
Marina Ammayi Vs. Secretary of State and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-30-1940
Reported in: AIR1941Mad446
two months' time within which the Secretary of State can deliberate whether he will comply with the demand made in the notice. In Lester v. Garlona (1789-1817) 33 E.R. 748, the question arose with reference to a … month or more after' the delivery of the bill.6. In Young v. Huggon (1836-47) 6 M & W 49, the action was for trespass against the defendant, a Magistrate, for breaking and entering the plaintiff's dwelling house
In Re: Sivakalathi Gramany
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-01-1940
Reported in: AIR1941Mad488
ORDERLakshmana Rao, J.1. The conviction is under Section 75, City Police Act, and the order under Section 106, Criminal P.C., is not called for. The order under Section 106, Criminal P.C., is therefore set aside and...
Mir Ghulam HussaIn Sahib Vs. Ayesha Bibi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-18-1941
Reported in: AIR1941Mad481; (1941)1MLJ800
Matched in: Citation AIR1941Mad481; (1941)1MLJ800
Donda Bhagavantulayya Dhora and ors. Vs. Adapa Venkandhora and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-04-1941
Reported in: AIR1941Mad484; (1941)1MLJ788
Matched in: Citation AIR1941Mad484; (1941)1MLJ788
Jagadambal and anr. Vs. Minor Sundarammal by Next Friend, Ponnusami Ch ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-1940
Reported in: AIR1941Mad46; (1940)2MLJ398
282, Niamathulla Khan Sahib v. Abdul Razack Sahib (1924) 22 L.W. 535. Cherukuri Nagamma v. Cherukuri Lakshminarasu : AIR1928Mad1085 , Ramrao Bhagwantrao v. Babu Appanna Samage (1939) 42 B.L.R. 143 and Jumma v. Ram Sahai : AIR1934All137 … J., reviewing the previous decisions of this Court, was satisfied that that was the rule. In all the Madras cases since then, as well as in the decisions of other High Courts, it has been held without … Cherukuri Lakshminarasu : AIR1928Mad1085 , Ramrao Bhagwantrao v. Babu Appanna Samage (1939) 42 B.L.R. 143 and Jumma v. Ram Sahai : AIR1934All137 , are among
The Nayar Modern Bank Ltd., by Its Managing Director M. Madhavan Nair ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-21-1940
Reported in: AIR1941Mad48; (1940)2MLJ559
in liquidation as the result of an order for compulsory winding up passed by this Court on the 4th September, 1938. On the 30th July, 1937, the appellant deposited with the Bank a sum of Rs. 1,000
C.S. Jagannatha Aiyangar Vs. Senniveera Chettiar and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-18-1940
Reported in: AIR1941Mad487; (1941)1MLJ197
Matched in: Citation AIR1941Mad487; (1941)1MLJ197
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »
Hover bars for counts · drag or use +/− to zoom · click a bar to filter by year
AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free