P Ltd V Their - Judgment Search Results

Babu.P.V. vs Radhakrishnan.P.V.

Court: Kerala

OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI THURSDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 11TH PHALGUNA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 6192 OF 2023 PETITIONER: 1 BABU P.V. AGED 44 YEARS S.O.KRISHNAN PATTERI VALAPPIL HOUSE, CHANGARAMKULAM,

P.V.S. Vencatachellum Vs. P.V.S. Kabalamurthy Pillai

Court: Chennai

Reported in: AIR1955Mad350

be held to be void; 'Muthuraman Chettiar v. Ponnusami', AIR 1915 Mad 1191 (Z13); -- 'T. V. Sangam Ltd. v. Shanmugha Sundaram', AIR 1939 Mad 769 (Z14).27. Therefore, realizing the limitation which ought to be observed in regard … Ramaswami, J.1. Suit is for a declaration that the plaintiff has not been and is not a bare tenant as from month to month under the defendant of

P.V.S. Kabalamurthi Pillai Vs. P.V. Subramania Pillai and ors.

Court: Chennai

Reported in: AIR1931Mad500; (1931)60MLJ332

that they should be continued but that in the interests of the' estate their duties should be more precisely denned than in the orders under which they were appointed. [His Lordship stated the facts and after dealing … Venkatasubba Rao, J.1. This summons is taken out by the 5th defendant. He applies that the receivers may either

P.V.S. Krishnamurthy Pillai and anr. Vs. P.V.S. Sundaramurthy Pillai a ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: AIR1932Mad381

Ramesam, J.1. The facts out of which these appeals arise are briefly these: One P. Venkatachalam was a well-known condiment and ice manufacturer of Madras. He acquired considerable property and died. One of … Ramesam, J.1. The facts out of which these appeals arise are briefly these: One P. Venkatachalam was a well-known condiment and ice manufacturer of Madras. He acquired considerable property and died. One of his

P.V.S. Kabalamurthi Pillai Vs. P.V. Subramania Pillai and ors.

Court: Chennai

Reported in: 131Ind.Cas.655

that they should be continued but that in the interests of the estate their duties should be more precisely defined than in the orders under which they were appointed.2. [His Lordship stated the facts and dealt with … Venkatasubba Rao, J.1. This summons is taken out by the 5th defendant. He applies that the Receivers may either

P.V.S. Krishnamurthi Pillai and anr. by Guardian Kokilambal Ammal Vs. ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (1932)63MLJ37

Ramesam, J.1. The facts out of which these appeals arise are briefly these: One P. Venkatachalam was a well-known condiment and ice manufacturer of Madras. He acquired considerable property and died. One of … Ramesam, J.1. The facts out of which these appeals arise are briefly these: One P. Venkatachalam was a well-known condiment and ice manufacturer of Madras. He acquired considerable property and died. One of his

P.V. Muhtu Amma and Three ors. Vs. P.V. Gopalan and Twenty-two ors.

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (1913)ILR36Mad593

away from the tarwad do not cover a case like the present one. He also refers to Parvathi v. Kamaran (1888) 6 Mad. 341 where it; was held that a male member of a Marumakkathayam tarwad is … 1. The plaintiffs in the suit are a Nair lady and her children and the suit is for maintenance for a

P.V. Prasanna Kumar and Another Vs. M/S Balaji Constructions, Rep. by ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

to appreciate the said contention in favour of the complainant. In Fakir Chand Gulati v. Uppal Agencies Pvt. Ltd., and another reported in 2008 CTJ 1038 (SC), the Apex court held: œIf the construction is part of … of by a common order: F.A.No.649/2012 is taken for discussion as a lead case. This is an appeal preferred by the complainant against the order in C.C.No.80/2011 dated 07-3-2012 on the file of District Forum, Kadapa. For

Chowk Mosque, Nandyal, by Mutavalli P.V.H. Abdul Razack Miah Vs. P.V.H ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1999(1)ALD396; 1999(1)ALT310

ORDER1. The Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order in IA No.985 of 1997 in OS No.469 of 1997 passed by the … shops are allowed to be constructed in the mosque premises.3. The learned District Munsif, Nandyal held that in view of Section 83 of the A.P. Wakf Act, 1995 (for short 'the Act'), the Civil Courts have no

N.P. Sankaran Nair Vs. P.V. Rama Iyer

Court: Kerala

Reported in: AIR1960Ker131

Cochin Harbour Railway station which ran as follows : 'Collections of date received from S. M. (1) P. V. Rama Iyer at 14 hours. Rs. 286-3-0 against Rs. 96-8-0 or Rs. 10-5-0 short. Same spent by S. … the District Court of Anjikaimal, Ernakulam, is the appellant before us. The suit was for damages for malicious prosecution against the first defendant and the Union of India (2nd defendant) represented by the General Manager, Southern Railway.2.