Application - Judgment Search Results

Work Vs. Louisiana

Court: US Supreme Court

..... wall 575 in which it was sought to enjoin the department from acting upon pending applications to prove preemption rights to the land new mexico v lane supra in which it .....

The Official Assignee Vs. Aiyu Dikshithar and ors.

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (1925)48MLJ530

..... the proceedings to which it was consequent for section 11 civil procedure code is not in terms applicable to such proceedings and can only be applied by analogy

Parvathi Ammal and ors. Vs. M. R. Sivarama Iyer

Court: Chennai

Reported in: AIR1927Mad90; 97Ind.Cas.998

..... case of a purchase in the name of a child this principle however is not applicable in india because of the existence of the custom of benami transaction as pointed out .....

Appana Prakasa Rao Vs. Yelamarti Ramanna and ors.

Court: Chennai

Reported in: AIR1926Mad1082; (1926)51MLJ358

..... charge should be kept on foot and consequently this decision of the privy council is applicable to the present case i may also mention that that case has been extended to .....

Ramalingam Chettiyar Vs. Gokuldas Madavji and Co.

Court: Chennai

Reported in: AIR1926Mad1021; 97Ind.Cas.871; (1926)51MLJ243

..... it is important to bear in mind that section 34 contains the rule of law applicable and that reference to the interest act is irrelevant 12 on this question there is .....

Ramasami Kavundan and anr. Vs. Tirupathi Kavundan

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (1927)52MLJ259

..... grant of land revenue alone nor could it be enfranchised the only form of settlement applicable to it was a permanent settlement it is therefore clear that in any palaiyam not .....

The Municipal Council by Its Chairman Vs. T. Shanmuga Moopanar

Court: Chennai

Reported in: AIR1926Mad251; (1926)51MLJ62

..... seed etc but the section itself makes it clear that this is a special definition applicable to provisions of that part of the act specially dealing with the carriage of grain .....

Vermulapalli Seetharamamma and ors. Vs. Maganti Appiah and anr.

Court: Chennai

Reported in: AIR1926Mad457; (1926)50MLJ689

..... according to respondent s vakil they would not be the natural guardians under hindu law applications to courts can only be made under the guardian and wards act and it has .....

Komiresetti Satyanarayana Vs. Yeeranki Chinna Venkatarao and ors.

Court: Chennai

Reported in: AIR1926Mad530; (1926)50MLJ674

..... and an indirect way of effecting the same thing and that the period of limitation applicable to them should be entirely different that is the view that has been taken in .....

(Manem) Ayyanna Vs. Pulavarti Veerabhadram

Court: Chennai

Reported in: AIR1926Mad62

..... a guarantee only agrees to be liable in case all the others sign has no application 4 i have not been able to find this doctrine laid down elsewhere to the .....