Skip to content

Privy Council Cases

Appeals from Indian courts heard by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and House of Lords - filter by originating court or search by party, citation, or keyword above.

Colonial & appellate judgments

Browse Privy Council & House of Lords decisions

Search appeals from Indian High Courts decided by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and related appellate benches - foundational authority for constitutional and commercial law.

Results · Chennai

Apr 13 1883 (PC)

Narayana Sanabhoga and anr. Vs. Narayana Nayak and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1883)ILR6Mad327

Innes, J.1. The contract being one of 1849 is not affected by the Transfer of Property Act, Sections 111 and 114 (see provisions of Clause C, Section 2), and the case has to be dealt with upon the principles upon which this Court has hitherto acted in a long series of decisions of which Kottal Uppi v. Edavalath Thathan Nambudri 6 M.H.C.R. 258 is a clear exponent.2. The proper course is to ascertain the intention of the parties and to give effect to that intention. Having regard to the entire contract, it appears to us that the clause of forfeiture for non-payment of rent was held over the defendant in terrorem and was not intended to be enforced.. It was thus what is styled a penal clause and will be relieved against. There is in the contract no clause of forfeiture upon alienation. It simply provides that the demises shall not alienate. The effect of this is limited to rendering the alienation inoperative against plaintiff.3. We agree to the decree passed by the District Judge and sha...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 13 1883 (PC)

PugardIn Ravutan Vs. Moidinsa Ravutan and anr.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1883)ILR6Mad414

Innes, J.1. It was objected that the Court could not in such a case exercise its powers of Revision under Section 622 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as under Section 522 an appeal is provided. The case, Boonjad Mathoor v. Nathoo Shahoo I.L.R. 3 Cal. 375 was quoted in proof of this position. That is a case under the old Act, and it does not appear to me to be applicable to the questions before us in the present case. Section 522 provides that no appeal shall lie from a decree upon an award, except in so far as the decree is in excess of, or not in accordance with, the award.2. The section assumes that the conditions existed for passing a decree, that is to say, an award regularly and properly arrived at by arbitrators duly appointed. In the present case each party named two arbitrators;, an umpire was appointed by consent of both parties.3. The Judge made the order of reference to arbitrators on the 17th December 1880, assuming the consent of the arbitrators nominated. On the 20th Dece...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 13 1883 (PC)

Pattathil Chathu Nayar Vs. Pattathil Aku and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1883)ILR7Mad26

1. The property in question in this suit had belonged to the joint family of the plaintiff, the first three defendants, and one Kandu Nayar.2. In 1858 there is said to have been a mortgage granted by Kandu Nayar, the karnavan, which was renewed in 1876.3. About 1852 the entire tarwad lands were apportioned, 51 paras of land being assigned to plaintiff's branch, and 51 paras to that of the first three defendants, and the 25 paras concerned in this suit to Kandu Nayar. It is found that at this date, or subsequently, there was a division, and that the family was no longer in union at the date of Kandu Nayar's death in 1865. Plaintiff and the first three defendants are children of sisters of Kandu Nayar, and as the 25 paras of land had become by the division his property, at his death the plaintiff and these defendants would take it in equal shares.4. The fourth defendant who obtained a decree against the first three defendants attached half of this property left by Kandu and had it sold i...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 13 1883 (PC)

Arthur Richard Hinde and anr. Vs. Ponnath Brayan and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1883)ILR7Mad52

Innes, J.1. On review, we found that the French Court had not jurisdiction, and that the Mahe judgment was not binding upon the parties to it. The question, therefore, remained whether the first defendant in this suit was still under the obligation to discharge the bond on which plaintiffs sue.2. As this question had not been decided by the District Judge in appeal, we remitted the issue 'Was the obligation of the first defendant on the bond relied on by the plaintiffs still undischarged at the date of the institution of the suit?'3. The District Judge returned a finding concurring with the finding at which the District Munsif had arrived, that there had been no discharge; but as it was objected that the defendant had received no proper notice of the hearing of the trial of this issue, and it was found on inquiry that this was so, we again remitted the issue for trial. It then came before another District Judg, who came to the conclusion that there bad been a discharge of the bond.4. O...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 14 1883 (PC)

Srinivasa Chari Vs. the Queen

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1883)ILR6Mad336

Charles A. Turner, Kt., C.J.1. The Judge has submitted this case for orders under the following circumstances.2. The accused, with other persons who have been acquitted, was tried on charges, of which some were, at the time the trial commenced, triable by a jury and others were not so triable. In accordance with the practice then obtaining, the jurors were empanelled as assessors in respect of the charges they were not competent to try as jurors.3. The trial was-protracted, and, before its conclusion, Act X of 1882 came into force. That Act, Section 269, prescribes that, where on a trial some charges are triable by a jury and others are not ordinarily so triable, all the charges shall be tried by a jury; and the Judge considers that the operation of the Act in this case was to convert the persons empanelled as assessors into jurors in respect of the charges they commenced to try as assessors. Inasmuch as the accused was convicted by the jury on one of those charges, and the Judge found...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 14 1883 (PC)

Koraga Vs. the Queen

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1883)ILR6Mad374

Charles A. Turner, Kt., C.J.1. We have considered the evidence recorded in this case, and are of opinion that it is not sufficient to prove that the cohabitation of a man and woman under the Alyasantana law constitutes such a marriage as is intended in those sections of the Penal Code which provide for the punishment of offences against the marriage right. That the Alyasantana law did not recognize such cohabitation as marriage appears to be shown by the circumstance that it founds upon it no rights of property or inheritance. The authority of the treatise attributed to Bhutalapandya has been seriously impugned.2. The customary cohabitation of the sexes under Alyasantana law appears to us to do no more than create a casual relation, which the woman may terminate at her pleasure, subject, perhaps, to certain conventional restraints among the more respectable classes, such as a money payment and the control of relations, etc., which may be prescribed as a check upon capricious conduct. I...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 19 1883 (PC)

Subramanya Ayyar and ors. Vs. the Secretary of State for India

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1883)ILR6Mad361

1. The appellants are inamdars in the Palaiyapat village of Urkad in the taluk of Ambasamudram in the district of Tinnevelly. Their ancestors had held 9-72 acres of wet land as inam from before 1800, for the purpose of maintaining a 'Dwadasi Katlai Chattram' and feeding four Brahmans on every Dwadasi or the 12th day of every lunar fortnight. They since divided the inam, and a third share is now held by one Yegna Subba Ayyar, the remaining two-thirds being held by the appellants. It was asserted by the zamindar of Urkad that the inamdars entered into an agreement in 1850 that they were to pay the zamindar every year seven kottais of paddy for each kottai of land for the maintenance of the charity. In 1864, the tenure on which this inam was held was investigated by the Inam Commissioner, and, on the 18th August 1864, the title-deed D was issued by that officer on behalf of the Governor in Council. It purported to have been issued to the manager for the time being of Dwadasi Katlai Chattr...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 20 1883 (PC)

The Queen Vs. Sri Vidya Sankara Narasimha Bharathi Guruswamulu

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1883)ILR6Mad381

Muttusami Ayyar, J.1. This is an appeal from an order of acquittal made by the Joint Magistrate of the district of Godavari in Calendar Case 2 of 1882 on his file. The complainant in this case is one Atmuri Lakshmi Narasimham, a komati by caste, and the District Munsif of Rajahmundry, and the respondent is the high priest of the Smarta sect in the Northern Circars, and the head of one of the six mattams belonging to that sect called Abhinava Virupakshi mattam. In 1881 there was an earnest discussion in Rajahmundry and in other places, as to whether widow-marriage was not really in accordance with Hindu Law, and whether, if contracted in opposition to the existing usage, it should entail loss of caste. As might be expected, there was a difference of opinion on the subject, and the party in favour of such marriage was numerically small in comparison with the orthodox party which was opposed to it. The foremost advocate of widow-marriage in Rajahmundry is one Kandukuri Virasalingam, a Bra...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 20 1883 (PC)

Saminadha Mudali Vs. the South Indian Railway Company

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1883)ILR6Mad420

1. The decision of this case turns on the construction we are to place on the terms 'silks in a manufactured state and whether wrought up or not wrought up with any other materials.' We are unable to agree with the Subordinate Judge that these terms were intended to apply to all classes of goods in which silk may be introduced; yet it is difficult to arrive at any precise definition of the terms. Mr. Shaw has called our attention to the case of Brunt v. The Midland Railway Company 2 H. & C. 889 in which a web known in the trade as silk web having a silk face and composed in the proportion of 1oz. of silk to 1 1/4oz. of India-rubber and 3/4 oz. of cotton with relative values of 12d or 13 1/2d (silk) to 7 1/2d (India-rubber) and 31 /4d (cotton) was held to be silk within the meaning of the Act. With the exception of articles 2, 3, 12b, and 16 not one of the pieces of goods produced in this case has a silk face. But there are several in which the silk forms the most expensive part of the ...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 20 1883 (PC)

In Re: T.P. Waller

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1883)ILR6Mad430

Charles A. Turner, Kt., C.J.1. It was enacted by the Civil Procedure Code, Act X of 1877, Section 8, that, save as provided in Sections 3, 25, 86, 223, 225, 386 and Chapter XXXIX, that Code should not extend to any suit or proceeding in any Court of Small Causes established in the towns of Calcutta, Madras or Bombay; but that the Local Government might, by a notification published in the official gazette, extend to such Court the Civil Procedure Code or any part thereof except so far as related to appeals and reviews of judgment.2. Chapter XX of that Code invested the District Court (a Court of unlimited jurisdiction in respect of value) with a jurisdiction in insolvency in the cases of insolvent judgment-debtors who might be residing, or in custody, within the local limits of its jurisdiction.3. The jurisdiction so conferred enabled the District Court not only to discharge and protect an insolvent judgment-debtor from imprisonment (Section 351), but committed to it powers which could ...

Tag this Judgment!

  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial