Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1920)ILR43Mad609
..... by a witness in a former proceeding was not admissible in a later proceeding between the same parties unless the.conditions prescribed by section 33 of the indian evidence act were found by the trial judge to exist.7. in arriving at this conclusion they expressly declined to follow an earlier ruling of this court--sri rajah ..... the present is scarcely less well established than in england, and is of such obvious convenience that very strong grounds should be shown for holding it inadmissible. the indian evidence act, it is true, contains no express recognition of the practice, but, neither, so far as i can see, is any such express recognition to be found ..... a previous judicial proceeding between the same parties where some of the issues were the same was based mainly on the provisions of sections 165 and 33 of the indian evidence act. section 165, which enables the presiding judge to ask any questions, 'about any fact relevant or irrelevant' contains a proviso, 'that the judgment must be .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1921Mad363; 61Ind.Cas.852
..... for india v. rajah of vizayanagaram 40 ind. cas. 896, in which i, with great diffidence, suggested that the rapidly changing character of the formation in indian rivers might to some extent affect the application of the reformation theory--or rather, as i intended to convey, that the question of how it was affected might deserve ..... words 'occupy' to read the phrase shall occupy as including 'shall continue to occupy,' occupation of property is a term applied not only to (he initial act of taking possession but to subsequent retention (vide the century dictionary) and i cannot think of a better exemplification of the latter meaning than the well known scriptural ..... and of the portion of plaintiff's kotipalli lanka adjoining it to the west. these plans wore prepared in connection with the revenue survey of sanapalli under act xxviii of 1860 in consequence of a boundary dispute between that village and the adjoining zemindari village of kotipalli and a comparison of the two shows the boundary .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 60Ind.Cas.802; (1920)39MLJ498
..... ch. d. 116 is against the policy of the law the condition will be ignored and the bequest simpliciter will be given effect to. section 23 of the indian contract act recognizes this principle as part of the law of india, but if there is no such repugnant condition and if there is no text of hindu law or a ..... failure of a condition, there is no reason why the principles which have governed english courts and which have found expression in the sections of the transfer of property act to which i have referred should not be applied to the construction of hindu dispositions of property. i shall now very briefly refer to the rule of english ..... in case of subsequent default, such as defendants allege, being unenforceable ; and we have to deal with this contention. ex. a was subsequent to the transfer of property act ; and, if its provisions are applicable there is nothing in them, against which the conditions for defeasance offend. for the last sentence of the explanation to section 19 contemplates .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1920)38MLJ360
..... legislative authority has sanctioned is inconsistent with any portion of the railways act, and the learned vakil for the respondent had not satisfied me on this point. i must therefore hold that the rule is inter vires. reference may also be made to toonya ram v. east indian railway company i.l.r. (1902) cal. 257 tippanna v. the ..... question. it was contended by the learned vakil for the respondent that a railway company is not competent to limit its liability to less than the minimum care which the indian contract act imposes on bailees. it is now well settled that under the indian law, a railway company has not the liabilities of an insurer but only those of a bailee ..... . see india general steam navigation company v. bhagwan chandra pal i.l.r. (1913) cal. 716 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1920)ILR43Mad617
..... railway act, and the learned vakil for the respondent has not satisfied me on this point. i must therefore hold that the rule is intra vires. reference may also be made to toonya ram v. east indian railway company i.l.r. (1903) cal., 257, tippanna v. the southern maratha railway company i.l.r. (1893) bom. 417 and east indian railway company ..... it was contended by the learned vakil for the respondent that a railway company is not competent to limit its liability to less than the minimum care which the indian contract act imposes on bailees. it is now well settled that under the indian law, a railway company has not the liabilities of an insurer but only those of a bailee ..... . see india general steam navigation company v. bhagwan chandra pal i.l.r. (1918) cal. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 55Ind.Cas.754
..... with the main question. it was contended by the learned vakil for the respondent that a railway company is not competent to limit its liability to less than the minimum care which the indian contract act imposes on bailees. it is now well settled that under the indian law, a railway company has not the liabilities of an insurer but only those of a bailee. see india ..... must be reasonable and just. there is great difference between the english law and the indian law on this subject. if i understand the position aright, a railway company in england would be authorised by parliament to make its own rules and regulations. it would be created by an act of parliament and would have full power to regulate its internal management. under these .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 54Ind.Cas.254
..... . 688 : 46 c.p 1056. a decision as to possession based solely upon local inspection is not what section 145, criminal procedure code, contemplates. the judicial committee in kessowji issur v. great indian peninsula railway company 31 b.p 381 : 9 bom. l.r. 671 : 11 c.w.n. 721 : 6 c.l.j. 5 : 4 a.l.j. 461 : 17 m.l ..... this court attaching the timber must necessarily go, because it is for the magistrate to say whether there was such an emergency as would justify him in acting under section 145, clause (4), criminal procedure code. this case is not covered by section 146; criminal procedure code. reid v. richardson 14 c.p 361 to which the learned counsel for ..... , the decision based on it must be set aside. for these reasons we are of opinion that the procedure adopted by the magistrate was irregular and that as he acted without jurisdiction in refusing to take evidence, his order should be set' aside. with the setting aside of the order, the order passed by the learned judge of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1919)37MLJ656
..... by the lower court that the station master did depute the signaller to collect tickets. rule 244 of the general rules made by the railway board acting under the indian railway board act (no. iv of 1905) says ' the station master shall be responsible for the efficient discharge of the duties devolving upon the several ..... to that person when he demands a pass or ticket is not obstruction to a railway servant in the discharge of his duty. we are unable to accept this argument. the appointment by the 'railway administration' or railway company of a particular person to do a particular duty is through agents empowered by rules ..... as 'any person employed by a railway administration in connection with the service of a railway', ' railway administration ' means (in this particular case) ' the railway company'. (see section 3 clause 6) 'railway company' means 'owners or lessees of a railway or parties to an agreement for working a railway ' (clause 5).5. thus a 'railway servant' in section 121 is .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1920)ILR43Mad75
..... is one carried on in british india. the learned advocate-general cited several english rulings in support of his arguments, but, as pointed out by lord halsbury in san paulo railway company v. carter [1896] a.c. 31 [see also per lord loreburn in de been consolidated mines, limited v. howe [1906] a.c. 455] it is a ..... directed the operations in saigon. mr. krishnaswami ayyar drew our attention to the difference between business being carried on and profits being received, as observed in san paulo railway company v. garter [1896] a.c. 31. the language employed by some of the noble lords in that case was very strongly relied on by the learned advocate-general ..... . egyptian hotels, limited [1915] a.c., 1022 at 1037, 1039, and commissioner of taxes for new zealand v. eastern extension australasia and china telegraph company [1906] a.c., 526. the indian income-tax act is in pari materia with the new zealand act dealt with in the last case; see also rex v. lovitt [1912] a.c., 212; sanders' income-tax .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 52Ind.Cas.505
..... bengal 25 c.p 54 : 13 ind. dec. (n.s.) 37 that unless the amount is settled the act is not applicable. in london, chatham and dover by. co., v. south eastern railway company (1892) 1 ch. 120 : 61 l.j. ch. 294 : 65 l.t. 722 : 40 w ..... case. the learned vakil for the appellant relied very strongly upon the observations of the noble and learned lords in london, chatham and dover railway company v. south eastern railway company (1893) a.c. 429 : 63 l.j. ch. 93 : 1 r.p 275 : 69 l.t. 637 : 58 ..... 733 : 8 moore p.c. (n.s.) 127 the judicial committee point out that indian courts are courts both of law and of equity and that they can award as damages interest not covered by the act. in hurropetsaud roy v. shamapersaud roy 3 c.p 651 : 1 c.l.r. ..... and good conscience, which are specially referred to in the civil courts act, the courts in india are at liberty to award interest in cases not coming within the purview of the interest act. the indian courts have followed this rule for a long time. the courts in .....
Tag this Judgment!