Privy Council Cases
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.
Colonial & appellate
Latest Privy Council judgments
Sivada Balarami Reddi Vs. Sivada Pera Reddi and ors.
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1883)ILR6Mad267
1. The burden lay on plaintiff of showing that first defendant by being taken into another family, otherwise than by adoption, had lost his rights of succession in his own family. The Judge reports that plaintiff is unwilling to undertake to establish by further evidence the custom for which he contends.2. The evidence already taken justified the conclusion arrived at that the first defendant, who had been taken in Illatam after the division between his father and uncle, had a right to share in the estate of the uncle that had devolved after the death of the father. We agree that the karar. in releasing the first defendant's right to share in the property of the family extended only to the property of his immediate family, and not to his rights in that of the divided uncle. The circumstances that a Karar was considered necessary to preclude the first defendant from succeeding in his immediate family is evidence that, without it, in the opinion of those concerned, he would have succeede...
Tag this Judgment!Thambu Chetti Subraya Chetti Vs. A.T. Arundel
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1883)ILR6Mad287
1. We entertain considerable doubt whether the Magistrates have come to a correct finding as to the nature of the building which is the subject of this reference.2. The original signification of the term Matha or Math is a building or set of buildings in which Hindu religious mendicants reside under a superior, who is called a Mahant. This spiritual superior is regarded with veneration by the members of the sect, and is installed with some ceremony, and not unfrequently receives an honorific title. Although a place of worship is not a necessary part of a Math, such a place is, as may be expected, often found in such institutions,, and, though intended primarily for the use of the inmates, the public may be admitted to it, and so this part of the building may become a place of religious worship. A Hindu Math somewhat resembles a Catholic Monastery. From the circumstance that a portion of it is not unfrequently devoted to worship, and that the public may be admitted to it, the term Math ...
Tag this Judgment!Varikara Vadaka Vittil Valia Pravathi and anr. Vs. Varikara Vadaka Vit ...
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1883)ILR6Mad341
Charles A. Turner, Kt., C.J. and Kindersley, J.1. The appellant urges two objections to the decree of the Lower Appellate Court, firstly; that the Judge in estimating the amount, which the appellant should receive as maintenance from the tarwad, has deducted a sum allowed by the Court of First Instance as maintenance for the lady who is regarded as his wife and for his offspring by her.2. Although it would seem inconsistent with the principles of the Maruma-katayam law that the tarwad should contribute to the maintenance of the ladies with whom the male members cohabit and of the issue of such cohabitation, these ladies and their issue being members of another tarwad, and entitled to claim maintenance from their own tarwad, unless they voluntarily remove from the house of their tarwad, it is urged in this Court that it is the practice of the country in North Malabar for females to reside during the whole year in the tarwad of the male with whom they cohabit, and that, during such resid...
Tag this Judgment!Burla Ranga Reddi Vs. Kalapalli Sithaya
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1883)ILR6Mad368
Innes, J.1. The parties agreed to accept the decision of the arbitrators without any appeal whatever. On the ground that in disposing of Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 50 of 1881 we overlooked this portion of the agreement and the objection to the jurisdiction of the Judge founded upon it, a Review is now sought of our order passed on 11th November 1881.2. The date of the karar was 30th March 1880. No suit was then pending. On the 20th July the petition was put into Court under Section 523 of the Civil Procedure Code to be numbered and registered as a suit. It was thereupon subject to the provisions prescribed with reference to a suit so filed (Section 524) so far as they might be consistent with the agreement filed, and it is said that the agreement in this case excluded all interference of a Court of Justice after the reference to arbitration. But, supposing the arbitrator arrived at a decision not warranted by the matters referred, or left out some material matter which had been r...
Tag this Judgment!The Queen Vs. Nabi Saheb
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1883)ILR6Mad247
Charles A. Turner, Kt., C.J.1. One Nabi Sahab, a Muhannadab by creed and a dealer in miscellaneous wares by profession was convicted by a Village Munsif of a petty theft and sentenced to be put in the stocks for three hours2. The District Magistrate has referred the case to this Court, suggesting that the accused did not belong to the class on which the infliction of the punishment of stocks is sanctioned.3. The 10th Section of Madras Regulation XI of 1816 authorize Village Munsif to inflict the punishment, if the offending parties be of any of the lower castes of the people on whom it may not be improper to inflict so degrading a punishment. inflict so4. The definition has been held by this Court to involve two conditions the one having relation to the position of the caste to which an offender belongs the other to the social status of the person himself. A dealer in petty or may not be a person on whom the infliction of the punishment may degrading but we agree with the Magistrate th...
Tag this Judgment!Huro Prasad Roy Chowdhry Vs. Chundee Churn Boyragee and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1883)ILR9Cal505
Wilson, J.1. We think that in this case there is no ground for interfering with the decision of the Court below.2. The suit was for enhancement of rent of a holding. It appears that the holding of the defendant was a tenure created under a certain amulnama. We must take it, the document itself not being before us, that the terms of the document are correctly stated in the judgment of the lower Appellate Court. It is there stated: 'It appears from the rubokaris and amulnama, dated 8th February 1849, that the land of this tenure was originally taken for the express purpose of clearing jungles. It was a khalari land. After the abolition of salt-manufacture, it became covered with jungle. The authorities thought it proper to let it out to the best advantage. As labour and capital must be laid out before this land could be brought into cultivation, it was thought fit to make a jungleburi tenure in favour of the defendants, the maximum rent whereof was fixed at 8 annas per bigha. Under the r...
Tag this Judgment!Anakattil Narayana Krishnan Karthavu Vs. Kocheri Pilo Pilo
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1883)ILR6Mad191
Innes and Kernan, JJ.1. The Subordinate Judge of South Malabar at Cochin refers for our decision the question whether his Court has jurisdiction to entertain a suit on a judgment of a Court in the Native State of Cochin.2. The obligation arising out of the duty to obey the judgment of a foreign Court is not one of the obligations upon which a suit can be entertained in the Small Cause Court....
Tag this Judgment!Ramanadan Chetti Vs. Periatambi Shervai and anr.
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1883)ILR6Mad250
Innes and Kernan, JJ.1. We are of opinion that the application of 1879, although not complying in every particular with the requirements of Section 235 of the Civil Procedure Code, was substantially an application made in accordance with law, and that, although it was returned for amendment and nothing further was done upon it, the application gives a fresh starting point from the date of its presentation. The present application is in time....
Tag this Judgment!Puna Karuppana Pillai Vs. Virabadra Pillai and anr.
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1883)ILR6Mad277
Innes, J.1. As we understand the case, the plaintiff sues a father and son for money properly borrowed for the son's marriage, the purpose being a proper and necessary family purpose. The District Munaif referes the question whether such a suit, including as it does a demand on the son, is properly within the jurisdiction of the Small Cause Court. He is of opinion that it is not, because the debt (he considers) was the debt of the father, and the liability of the son to pay the debt of the father is a liability not arising by contract, but by Hindu Law. We think that the suit is cognizable by a Court of Small Causes. The debt is not, properly speaking, the debt of the father, but the debt of the father and son, the father having, in borrowing the money, acted as manager and agent of the family. There is nothing, therefore, to prevent the cognizance of the suit by the Small Cause Court.2. We may further observe that in Govinda Munaya Tiruyan v. Bapu 5 M.H.C.R. 200 it was held that the w...
Tag this Judgment!Muthura Persad Singh and anr. Vs. Luggun Kooer and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1883)ILR9Cal615
Wilson, J.1. We think that the Subordinate Judge has decided this case rightly. He says: I am of opinion that the stipulation made as to the payment of interest at the rate of Rs. 2 per cent per mensem from the time of the execution of the bond, in case of default of repayment of the loan in time, was laid down in the deed as a check upon the debtor, and it should undoubtedly be held as a penal clause.'2. Several cases were cited to us in which full effect has been given to an agreement, that if money is not paid at the due date it shall from that time bear an' increased rate of interest-Boolakee Lall v. Radha Singh 22 W.R. 223; Mackintosh v. Wingrove I.L.R. 4 Cal. 137.3. The former of these cases probably dealt with a document executed before the Contract Act; but however that may be such cases differ materially from the present. In them the agreement to pay an increased rate of interest from a future day may well be regarded as a substantive part of the contract, not as penalty for i...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 156
- 157
- 158
- 159
- 160
- 162
- 163
- 164
- 165
- 166
- Next ›
- Last »