Sup Ct - Judgment Search Results

Ct. A. Ct. Nachiappa Chettiar and ors. Vs. Ct. A. Ct. Subramaniam Chet ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1960SC307; [1960]2SCR209

from a pertition suit (O.S. No. 91 of 1941) field by the respondent Subramanian Chettiar against his brother Ct. A. Ct. Nachiyappa Chettiar and his four sons, applicant 1 to 5 respectively, in the court of the … he put the respondent to the strict proof of the allegations made by him in the plaint in support of his claim. 5. In reply to the contentions thus raised by the appellants the respondent field a

Dr. CT Muthiah Vs CT Murugappan and 4 others

Court: Chennai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDated : 05.02.2025CORAMTHE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR Dr.CT Muthiah ... Applicant Vs.1. C.T.Murugappan2. PL.S.Subramanian3. A.Kannammal4. Visalakshi5. C.Devaki ... RespondentsReview Application has been filed under Order 47 Rule 1 of...

Ct. A. Ct. Chidambaram Chettiar Vs. Ct. A. Ct. Subramanian Chettiar an ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: AIR1953Mad492; (1952)2MLJ524

that the plaintiff has preferred C. M. A. No. 210 of 1946. (8) In this Court apart from supporting the judgment of the Court below on the two grounds aforesaid, Mr. K. Bhashyam Aiyangar the learned counsel

Pl.M.Ct.M. Krishnappa Chettiar Vs. Pl.M.Ct.M. Kasiviswanathan Chettiar

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (1945)1MLJ222

King, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for partition brought by one brother against another in the Court of the learned Subordinate Judge of Sivaganga. The defendant resisted the suit on the ground that...

M. Ct. Muthiah and anr. Vs. Controller of Estate Duty, Madras

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1986SC1863; (1986)58CTR(SC)164; [1986]161ITR768(SC); 1986(2)SCALE54; 1986Supp(1)SCC375; [1986]3SCR315

the deceased with the Insurance Company, the deceased had effected a nomination in favour of his son M. Ct. Muthiah. On the 13th March, 1954, the deceased died following the crash of the airliner in which he … in curdgeon-leaf purported to have been executed on 7th June, 1931 was produced before the Deputy Controller in support of the above plea. The Deputy Controller did not accept the genuineness of the said document. But even

Shri M. Ct. Muthiah, Huf-ii Vs. the Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (2003)180CTR(Mad)238

us see some Dictionaries where some of the words are considered. It is no doubt true that the Supreme Court in number of cases has cautioned that it is not advisable to interpret the provisions of a

A. K. A. Ct. Vs. Ct. Alagappa Chettiar and Others V. Commissioner of I ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: [1965]55ITR605(Mad)

?'The facts are as follows : A Hindu undivided family of Nagarathars having the vilasam A. K. A. CT. V. consisted originally of the father, Chidambaram Chettiar, and his four sons, Alagappa, Meenakshisundaram, Venkatachalam and Annamalai. The … however, has been written an old stamp papers, originally purchased by strangers. There is no contemporaneous evidence in support of its execution. The four brothers entered into another agreement among themselves on December 18, 1950, on two

A.K.A. Ct. V. Ct. Meenakshisundaram Chettiar Vs. A.K.A. Ct. V. Ct. Ven ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: AIR1980Mad105

plaint the plaiintiff, the defendant and their two brothers Alagappa and Annamalai were partners of A. -K. A. CT. V. Firm carrying on business at Kualalumpur each of them having one-fourth share. On 22-1-1965 the plaintiff executed … made on behalf of the plaintiff appellant on the question of valuation. In the petitioner's affidavit Med in support of the petition, it is alleged that the object of the defendant is only coerce the petitioner to

A.K.A.Ct. V.C.T. Meenakshisundaram Chettiar Vs. A.K.A.Ct.V.C.T. Venkat ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (1979)1MLJ398

and unambiguous allegations made by the plaintiff in his plaint which we have already extracted in the paragraph supra. There is no ambiguity in the allegations made in the plaint as regards tire defendant receiving from Alagappa

A.K.A.Ct.V.Ct. Meenakshisundaram Chettiar Vs. A.K.A.Ct.V.Ct. Venkatach ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (1979)2MLJ104

plaint the plaintiff, the defendant and their two brothers Alagappa and Annamalai were partners of A. K. A. CT. V. Firm carrying on business at Kula. Lumpur each of them having one-fourth share. On 22nd January, 1965 … already made on behalf of the plaintiff-appellant on the question of valuation. In the petitioner's affidavit filed in support of the petition, it is alleged that the object of the defendant is only to coerce the petitioner