Court : Chennai
Reported in : 85Ind.Cas.268
..... jegon v. vivian (1871) 6 ch. a. 742, before the house of lords, the lord chancellor generally approves of the principle that in awarding damages a distinction may be made between a trespasser bona ..... placing a wrong doer upon precisely the same footing as one who enters with the owner's permission.' the learned judge proceeds further to indicate that the wilfulness of an act of trespass and that the trespass was done for the pecuniary benefit of the defendants' would be matters to be taken into consideration in assessing damages. in the case of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1928All305
..... and carefully explained how the words therein cannot be said to offend against the provisions of section 25, paper currency act (10 of 1923) which replaced previous similar acts which dated back from 1871 down. what section 25, paper currency act, prohibits is this:no person in british india shall draw, accept make or issue any bill of exchange, hundi, ..... thereof without endorsement to the payment of any sum of money on demand... shall be deemed to be notes within the meaning of the english bank charter act. the indian paper currency act has not been so explained, but the same interpretation should be given to its words. the real test, therefore, is whether the promissory note in ..... the words 'payable to bearer' had not existed, a note payable to a person or his order would not have offended against the provisions of the indian paper currency act. the judgment of farran, j., in jetha parkha v. ram chandra vithoba [1892] 16 bom. 689 is a valuable contribution to the law on the subject. here .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1893)ILR16Mad366
..... mention of the name of the mortgagor, but lays down that the acknowledgment is sufficient, though it omits to specify the exact nature of the right. under the act of 1871 an acknowledgment of the mortgagor's title or right of redemption was required, and if it had been the intention of the legislature that the name of the mortgagor ..... the mortgage of 1805 was true, but relied on the act of limitations. he failed to show that there was any other mortgage to which the acknowledgment of the testator could have referred. under these circumstances the decision of the ..... .' the question is whether this is such an acknowledgment of liability in respect of the property as to bring it within the requirements of section 19 of the limitation act. there can be no doubt that it was an acknowledgment by the testator that he then held the estate on kanom title. the defendant in this suit admitted that .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1912)23MLJ715
..... the lower appellate court in holding that, assuming there was a forfeiture by reason of nonpayment'of rent, it could not be enforced as the plaintiff had not done any act to show he intended to avail himself of the forfeiture, would seem to have followed the decision of this court in venkalramana bhatta v. gundaraya 31 m.k 403. in ..... , it was not brought to the notice of the court that the lease in question was prior to the coming into operation of the transfer of property act. the lease in the present case, was made in 1871 before the transfer of property act came into operation and this being so, according to the decision in padmanabhaya v. ranga 34 m. k161 an ..... act on the part of the landlord showing that he elects to take advantage of the forfeiture is not a condition precedent to his right to sue in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1937Mad589
..... , the receiver cannot take action under order 21, rule 89, civil p.c. he relied on both order 11, rule 1, civil p.c., and section 20, provincial insolvency act. the argument of mr. govindarajachari is that order 40, rule 1(d) comes into operation only when the property has been committed to the possession of the receiver under order ..... power of appointment he was ordered to exercise all the powers of an owner under order 40, rule 1 (d), civil p.c., and he was also expressly empowered to act under order 21, rule 89, civil p.c., to set aside the sale of the said immoveable property after raising the necessary funds. therefore his appointment as interim receiver ..... of court and not an agent of the party. but this statement is not strictly accurate because for certain purposes he does act as the agent of the real owner. as observed by phear, j. in wilkinson v. gangadhar sircar (1871) 6 b lr 486 :whatever the receiver rightly does, with regard to the property he does it simply as the agent .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2006(2)MPHT344
..... leading to discovery of certain fact which was not in the knowledge of the police previously. in the matter of thimma v. state of mysore air 1971 sc 1871, the apex court has held that once a fact is discovered from other sources there can be no fresh discovery even if relevant information is extracted from the ..... new fact was discovered by the information given by applicant siddhu. therefore, it is held that the information (ex. p-3) recorded under section 27 of the evidence act is inadmissible in evidence. apart from this statement, there is no incriminating evidence available on record against applicant siddhu.13. likewise the information (ex. p-13) said ..... evidence being the information regarding the fact which was already known to the police and therefore this information was not admissible in evidence. section 27 of the evidence act reads as under:-provided that when any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1980Raj116
..... muhammadans and the vendee a non-muhammadan, is the muhammadan law of preemption to be applied to the matter in advertence to the terms of section 24 of the act vi of 1871', and the question was answered in the affirmative on the ground that pre-emption was a right which the owner of certain immoveable property possessed as such for the ..... the suit as regards such plaintiff or defendant shall be deemed to have been instituted on any earlier date. unfortunately the proviso to section 21(1) of the indian limitation act, 1963 has no application to this case, and we have no power to direct that the suit should be deemed to have been instituted on a date earlier than ..... p. w. 4 to the effect that there was no entry in the account books of ram kumar suraj bux. it is further contended that the lower courts have acted illegally in holding the plaintiffs' claim based on shafi-a-khalit as proved. the plaintiffs have utterly failed to prove that they ever used the stairs for approaching the disputed .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1892)IIMLJ130
..... of the kind then in question embodied one single transaction or might properly be said to contain more. the same view has been taken by this court after the registration act of 1871 came into force, stri seshathri ayyengar v. sankara ayen 7 m. h. c. r 296; jagappa v. latchappa i. l. r 5 m 119. achoo ..... , as evidence in support of the claim for the movables, which alone are sought to be recovered in this suit.12. section 49 of the present registration act renders an unregistered document inadmissible as evidence of any transaction affecting immovable property, which is the kind of property expressly mentioned in the preceding clause and referred to as ..... the document or use it in evidence in respect of any part of the transaction in question. i think this contention is unsustainable. section 49 of the registration act lays down that no document required to be registered by section 17 shall, unless duly registered, 'affect any immovable property comprised therein,' or 'be received as evidence .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1927Cal1
..... that has been laid down by this court in the case of woomesh ch. chatterji v. chundee churn roy choudhuri [1871] 7 cal. 293. the learned chief justice said at page 295:the 167th section of the evidence act provides. that the improper admission of evidence shall not be ground of itself for a new trial, if it shall appear ..... and determining, as a question of fact whether it is sufficient of itself to warrant the lower court's finding.6. my learned brother mr. justice cuming did not act on that principle. the evidence was not examined by the division bench, but the learned judge apparently relied upon the further observation of the learned chief justice at page 296 ..... by the learned advocate that the learned munsif in an. earlier part of his judgment bad proceeded in accordance with the provisions of section 7 of the bengal tenancy act, which is a section in the chapter which relates to tenure-holders. he further drew our attention to the entry in the record-of-rights, which being translated is .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1981MP166
..... judge had no right to refuse exercise of jurisdiction, which inhered in him .10. no doubt, it would be better it specific provision is introduced in the act as recommended by the madhya pradesh law commission to obviate cropping of situations of the present character.11. in view of the aforesaid discussion, it appears necessary, in ..... power and authority to administer justice in case of emergency remaining intact with them, as discussed above. courts can perform judicial act even on a holiday. in ununto ram chatterjee v. protab chunder shiromonee, (1871) 16 suth wr 230, it has been held that a plaint may be received and admitted by a munsif on a ..... on which work is wholly or partially suspended; day of recreation and amusement; to have a holiday every saturday, on one's birthday etc.'7. section 21 of the act does not use the expression 'summer vacation', wha' it talks of is holidays. accordingly, the expression 'summer vacation' used in the aforesaid notification appears to be synonymous .....
Tag this Judgment!