Court : Chennai
Reported in : 15Ind.Cas.409
S. A. No. 1484 of 1909.1. The plaintiffs in this case are persons who are entitled to the 1st, 3rd and 4th thirthams in the temple of Thirunagiri Ranganatha Swamy. Defendants Nos. 7 to 23 are entitled to thirtham along with them. Defendants Nos. 1 to 3 are the trustees of the temple and defendants Nos. 4 to 6 are the Archakas, whose duty it is to carry on the daily worship of the idol. The object of the suit is to establish the plaintiffs' right to receive the thirtham first after the conclusion of the siva and Sathu-murai, that is, after the recitation of Tamil Vedas and hymns. In the plaint, the ' plaintiffs ask also for the establishment of their lights to other emoluments appertaining to the office they hold, 'but the right to these other honours and emoluments was really not denied by any of the defendants. There was a previous suit by some of the defendants jointly entitled to the 1st thirtham along with the plaintiffs for the establishment of their right to the honours and emolu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1913)ILR40Cal192
Chaudhuri, J.1. This is a suit instituted by the Administrator General of Bengal for the construction of the Will of Dr. Henry Wilkin Jones, who died on the 8th July 1909 after having made and published his Will, dated the 14th April 1884 and four codicils dated the 22nd May 1901, 2nd March 1903, 15th December 1906 and 19th December 1908. The will and the first and second codicils were deposited according to the provisions of Section 105, Succession Act. The third codicil was registered, but was not deposited. The fourth codicil was neither registered nor deposited.2. It is contended by the next-of-kin of the testator Thomas Gill Jones that in so far as the fourth codicil was not executed twelve months before the testator's death and deposited within six months in some place provided by law for the safe custody of wills, according to the provisions of Section 105 Succession Act, the will and codicils are entirely inoperative, inasmuch as the will must be taken to have been made on the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1913)15BOMLR362; 19Ind.Cas.882
Heaton, J.1. The first question which was raised in this appeal was that no appeal lay because it was, it is urged, an appeal against a decree and such appeal is barred by class. (2) of Section 21 of the second Schedule of the Civil Procedure Code. But we think that the proceedings, and the Judge's order, and the Memorandum of Appeal, make it quite clear that the appeal is not against a decree but is against the order directing that the award be filed.' And that is an appeal which is specifically allowed by class. (f) of Section 104 of the Code. There is therefore nothing in that question which was raised as a preliminary point by the respondent. Three separate objections have been taken by the appellant.2. The first is that the award is so indefinite as to be incapable of execution. This objection can be taken under Section 14 of the second Schedule. A careful reading of the award itself discloses that the objection to it, if any, is rather that it is too definite and not indefinite. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Morrisdale Coal Co. v. Pennsylvania R. Co. - 230 U.S. 304 (1913) U.S. Supreme Court Morrisdale Coal Co. v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 230 U.S. 304 (1913) Morrisdale Coal Company v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company No. 207 Argued April 15, 1913 Decided June 9, 1913 230 U.S. 304 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT Syllabus Without preliminary action by the Interstate Commerce Commission declaring that the carrier had, by the rule adopted in regard to distribution of cars, discriminated against a shipper in such distribution, the federal courts have no jurisdiction of suit by such shipper for damages alleged to be occasioned by undue discrimination against him and undue preference in favor of his competitor. The question as to the reasonableness of a rule of car distribution is administrative in its character, and calls for the exercise of the powers and discretion conferred by Congress upon the Interstate Commerce Commission. Where the alleged discriminat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1914Mad174; (1915)ILR38Mad997
Ayling, J.1. The suits out of which these Second Appeals arise are all of a similar character. They are brought by various proprietors of land under the Godavari anicut system for a declaration of their right to irrigate their lands with anicut water free of water rate, for an injunction restraining Government from levying water rate under Act VII of 1865, and, except in Second Appeal No. 1774 of 1911, for a refund of the amounts collected.2. The substantial question involved in each is the extent to which Government is bound to allow the irrigation free of water rate. It is not denied that the water used is Government water; the only question is whether Government is bound by an 'engagement' within the meaning of Section 1 of Act VII of 1865 to allow the irrigation free of charge,3. Some of the suits deal with mokhasa villages, others with minor inams, and such may conveniently be treated separately.4. Second Appeals Nos. 1398 to 1401 and 1770 and 1774 of 1911 all arise out of suits r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Russell v. Sebastian - 233 U.S. 195 (1914) U.S. Supreme Court Russell v. Sebastian, 233 U.S. 195 (1914) Russell v. Sebastian No. 415 Argued January 6, 1914 Decided April 6, 1914 233 U.S. 195 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Syllabus In determining the question of impairment under the contract clause of the Constitution, it is the duty of this Court to determine for itself the nature and extent of rights acquired under prior legislative or constitutional action. The state court having construed a statutory or constitutional provision, Page 233 U. S. 196 which gave specified privileges in regard to public utilities in a certain class of municipalities under specified conditions without specifying the persons or corporations who could avail thereof or the method of acceptance, to the effect that the grant became effective in any municipality within the designated class by the party accepting it as if it had been made specially to the accepting party, th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Lazarus, Michel & Lazarus v. Prentice - 234 U.S. 263 (1914) U.S. Supreme Court Lazarus, Michel & Lazarus v. Prentice, 234 U.S. 263 (1914) Lazarus, Michel & Lazarus v. Prentice No. 1012 Motion to dismiss or affirm submitted May 4, 1914 Decided June 8, 1914 234 U.S. 263 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Under clause 20 of 2 of the Bankruptcy Act as added by the amendment of June 25, 1910, the bankruptcy courts have ancillary jurisdiction over persons and property within their respective territorial limits in aid of a trustee or receiver appointed in any court of bankruptcy. Property of the bankrupt, when seized by an ancillary receiver or trustee, is held by virtue of the terms of the Bankruptcy Act to be turned over to the court of original jurisdiction, and no right can be acquired in it by assignment subsequent to the petition which can defeat this purpose. Under subd. d of 60 of the Bankruptcy Act, attorney's fees for services i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Order of St. Benedict v. Steinhauser - 234 U.S. 640 (1914) U.S. Supreme Court Order of St. Benedict v. Steinhauser, 234 U.S. 640 (1914) Order of St. Benedict v. Steinhauser No. 267 Argued March 11, 1914 Decided June 22, 1914 234 U.S. 640 CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT Syllabus In a suit by an ecclesiastical society to recover from the administrator of a deceased member assets of the estate as community property under the provisions of the constitution and membership, the question for the courts is not one of canon law or ecclesiastical polity, but one solely of civil rights. Where the state has chartered a society as one of "religious men living in community," a provision in its constitution for community ownership, with renunciation of individual rights in private property during continuance of membership, with freedom of withdrawal, is not invalid as opposed to the public policy of, but is directly sanctioned by, the state creating the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1916All253(1); (1915)ILR37All233
Tudball and Rafiq, JJ.1. This and the connected appeal, No. 436 of 1912, arise out of one suit, being cross-appeals from the same decree. The main facts are not in dispute and are as follows:Sheikh Minnatullah died, leaving as his heirs, his widow, the present plaintiff, and his father, Khadim Husain. Under Muhammadan Law, the widow inherited a one-fourth share in his estate and the other three fourths went to the father. The latter died subsequently, leaving the present six defendants as his heirs.2. Under a mortgage-deed, dated the 14th of February, 1891, Nasratullah and Musammat Karamat Bibi borrowed Rs. 7,296 from Minnatullah. After the death of Khadim Husain, the first defendant, Musammat Amina Bibi, his widow, obtained a succession certificate in regard to this debt due from the mortgagor. Then she and the remaining defendants jointly sued to recover the mortgage-debt, impleading the present plaintiff as a pro forma defendant admitting that she was entitled to a one-fourth share ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 34Ind.Cas.309
1. These twenty-one Rules have been heard together. They were issued to show cause why the orders directing the prosecution of the petitioners upon the charge of refusing to serve as special constables should not be set aside.2. The petitioners live in four villages adjoining two ferries named Dih Ghat and Itwa Ghat, lease of which is held by a certain Rambirich and his son under the District Magistrate and District Board of Mozafferpur. These ferry farmers complained that in January and March last there had been riotous disturbances over their use of the ferry, and in consequence proceedings were instituted against thirteen of the present petitioners under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the purpose of binding them down to keep the peace, During the pendency of these proceedings, the ferry farmers, on the 14th April, again complained that the vlilagers did not allow them to ply the ferry and prayed that certain persons named by them should be made special constables....
Tag this Judgment!