Skip to content


Married Women S Property Act 1874 Section 9 - Judgment Search Results

Home > Cases Phrase: married women s property act 1874 section 9 Year: 1925 Page 1 of about 320 results (2.268 seconds)
Mar 06 1925 (PC)

Gokuldoss Goverdhan Doss (Dead) and anr. Vs. Dwarakadoss Goverdhan Dos ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-06-1925

Reported in : AIR1925Mad1249; (1925)49MLJ457

..... marriage the question has come up in connection with the married women s property act as to what is the meaning of carrying on business ..... bankruptcy the explanation to section 9 of the presidency towns insolvency act declares that the act of an agent may be an act of the principal for ..... cases like dawe v vergara 1883 11 qb 241 ex parte schomberg 1874 10 ch a 172 and ex parte salaman in re taylor 1882 .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Mar 06 1925 (PC)

Gokaldoss Govardhandoss Vs. Parry and Co. and the Official Assignee of ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-06-1925

Reported in : (1925)ILR68Mad795

..... marriage the question has come up in connexion with the married women s property act as to what is the meaning of carrying on business under ..... bankruptcy the explanation to section 9 of the presidency towns insolvency act declares that the act of an agent may be an act of the principal for ..... 11 q b d 241 and ex parte schomberg in re schomberg 1874 10 ch app 172 and ex parte sail man in re taylor .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Apr 14 1925 (PC)

Muhammad Abdul Rab Vs. Khodaija Bibi

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Apr-14-1925

Reported in : AIR1925All457

girl s father was appointed her guardian subsequently she was married and her husband aziz ahmad was appointed her guardian aziz order in execution and obtained delivery of possession of the property subsequent to the delivery of possession abdul rab applied to j 1 this appeal arises under the guardians and wards act the appellant was appointed guardian of the minor mt khodaija which may subsequently be discovered this is expressly provided in section 41 4 of the act viii of 1890 it must

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Aug 24 1925 (PC)

Pazhaniandy Tarakan Vs. Murukappa Tarakan and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-24-1925

Reported in : AIR1926Mad367; 92Ind.Cas.124; (1926)50MLJ49

there is no recital as to the possession of the property and in the cases relied on by the appellant muniswami on the ground that under section 8 of the trusts act plaintiff was bound to hold the property on behalf of possession of the property section 88 does not apply in section 88 there is no recital as to the possession of

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Feb 24 1925 (PC)

Fazara Khatun Bibi Vs. Matior Rahman and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Feb-24-1925

Reported in : AIR1925Cal1255

the contract being entered into between the parties who are married in this particular case the kabilnama was executed in favour the case of specific performance of a contract relating to property in a case of marriage between muhammadans the real contracting that the law as to which article of the limitation act is applicable to a registered kabilnama is practically settled see

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Jan 01 1925 (PC)

Daulat Ram Vs. Kanhaiya Lal

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jan-01-1925

Reported in : AIR1925All419; 87Ind.Cas.417

not belong to the plaintiff alone but was the joint property of the plaintiff and the defendants neither of the two not necessary to prepare a decree but where one is actually prepared the time for obtaining a copy of the decree time for obtaining a copy of the decree should under section 12 of the limitation act be excluded in computing the should have held that the appeal was filed within time 9 it is argued that it was unnecessary to make a

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Aug 07 1925 (PC)

Pathinti Gundappa Vs. Karnam Narasappa and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-07-1925

Reported in : AIR1927Mad455

in schedule a after mailarappa s death she got narasamma married to sitaramappa brother s son of kristappa the marriage must two contentions first that it is not shown that the properties belonged to the estate of the propositus mailarappa secondly the the suit is barred by limitation under the old limitation act of 1859 2 exhibit d shows the patta in the recover the properties of one mailarappa after the death on 9th july 1917 of his daughter narasamma in whom the estate

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Jul 06 1925 (PC)

Musammat Kishan Dei Vs. Sheo Paltan

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jul-06-1925

Reported in : 90Ind.Cas.358

musammat mano was a virgin maiden and that she was married in the brahma form and the ceremony of going round other relations that she would remain in possession of the property for her life and after her death the plaintiff and statutory forms e g marriage under the widows re marriage act which also may be difficult to class under any of of marriage is not identical with any of those forms 9 now if we examine the definitions of the various forms

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Nov 04 1925 (PC)

Krishnaswami Naidu and ors. Vs. S. Varnikalingam Pillai and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-04-1925

Reported in : AIR1926Mad1199; 97Ind.Cas.433

cannot be given decree charging the amount against the trust property we observed that it would be clear injustice to pass and that is that mutha pillai who executed ex a acted alone and not in conjunction with the other two trustees the trustees to join together this is the law under section 48 of the trusts act section 47 prohibits the delegation as between the deceased mutha pillai and the trust funds 9 the decree which the plaintiffs ask for in the present

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

May 01 1925 (PC)

E. Rajagopalachariar Vs. Sami Reddi and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : May-01-1925

Reported in : AIR1926Mad517; (1926)50MLJ221

that there is a moral obligation to get her son married and therefore she is entitled to borrow for the purpose shown for the position that a mother could alienate the property inherited by her own father for the purpose of getting to alienate ancestral property and the sons cannot question his act but no such obligation is laid upon the father to

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //