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
Baba Vs. Timma and ors.
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1883)ILR7Mad357
Charles A. Turner, Kt., C.J. (Innes, Kindersly and Muttusami Ayyar, JJ.)1. The question referred in this appeal is, whether a Hindu father, while unseparated from his son, has power to alienate to a stranger his self-acquired moveable estate, and his undivided share in the ancestral estate, moveable and immoveable.2. It may be admitted that some passages in the Mitakshara, respecting the father's power of alienation, are apparently conflicting; nevertheless they may be reconciled, and, when reconciled, are in agreement with the dicta of other commentators to whom reference is made as of authority in Southern India.3. To understand the subject, it is necessary to bear in mind the distinction which Hindu lawyers recognized between the ownership of, and dominion over, property, which distinction is clearly declared in relation to the question now under consideration by Devanda Bhatta in a passage to which I shall presently refer.4. In discussing the question, whether partition is the caus...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Govindappa Nayak and Antoni
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1883)ILR7Mad36
Charles A. Turner, Kt., C.J.1. As I understand this case, a panchayit was assembled at the instance of the relatives of the complainant to inquire whether the accused Govindappa Nayak had any justification for applying an injurious epithet to the complainant. Being required to justify himself, Govindappa Nayak made the statement in respect of which defamation is charged and intimated that he had derived his information of the fact from Antoni. Antoni was then sent for and required to justify himself for giving such information. He then made a statement as to circumstances he believed he had witnessed. For the statements made by them on the occasion mentioned, Govindappa and Antoni have been convicted of defamation.2. I agree with the Sessions Judge that the statements were, on the occasion referred to; privileged. They were made in good faith for the protection of the interests of the persons making them. It being imputed to Govindappa and Antoni by the panchayit that they had defamed ...
Tag this Judgment!The Municipal Commissioners of Mangalore Vs. J.A. Davies
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1883)ILR7Mad65
Charles A. Turner, Kt., C.J.1. Although the Vice-President should not have revised the assessment list and included Mr. Davies, for no emergency is shown which justified it, we cannot say that the revision was a nullity.2. The maxim, Quod fieri non debet factum valet, applies to such a case. Mr. Davies cannot rely on the insufficiency of the notice of assessment as an answer to the charge. Setting aside the acquittal, we order a new trial....
Tag this Judgment!Michael Vs. Ameena Bibi and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1883)ILR9Cal733
Norris, J.1. This is a mortgage suit. The plaint states that on 8th January 1881 the defendant No. 1 mortgaged certain premises to the plaintiff to secure the repayment of Rs. 12,000 with interest.2. By an indenture of 21st January 1882 the defendant No. 1 conveyed the mortgaged premises, subject to the mortgage, to defendants Nos. 2 and 3 upon trust for certain charitable purposes.3. The prayer of the plaint is 'that an account may be taken of what is due to the plaintiff for principal and interest on the security of the said indenture of mortgage of 8th January 1881, and that in default of payment of the amount to be found due, and of the plaintiff's costs of this suit by a short day to be appointed by the Court in that behalf, the defendants may be absolutely foreclosed of all equity of redemption of and in the said mortgaged premises or otherwise that the same may be sold under the direction of this Honorable Court.'4. A question arises as to the sufficiency of the service of the s...
Tag this Judgment!Shadulla Howladar and anr. Vs. the Empress
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1883)ILR9Cal875
Prinsep, J.1. After considering the evidence on the record in this case, we are of opinion that the appellants have been rightly convicted under Sections 149 and 304 of the Indian Penal Code. It is clear that they were the ringleaders in a premeditated riot, with the knowledge and intention necessary to bring them within these sections. The mob, of which the appellants were the ringleaders, consisted of about one hundred and twenty-five men, said to have been armed with shields, spears, and clubs. One man was killed, and others were injured.2. On these facts we hold that the appellants have been properly convicted, and we also think that the sentences passed on them are not too severe. The appeals are, therefore, dismissed.3. It is necessary, however, to make some observations on the procedure adopted by the Sessions Judge. He has taken advantage of the terms of Section 309 of the present Code to sum up the evidence for the prosecution and defence to the assessors. This provision has, ...
Tag this Judgment!Rookminy Bullub Roy Vs. Mulk Jamania Begum
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1883)ILR9Cal915
Richard Garth, C.J.1. This suit was brought by the plaintiff, a zamindar, against the wife of the Nawab Nazim of Bengal, for rent of a patni for the year 1284 and part of the year 1285.2. The defendant holds the patni under a grant from the Nawab Nazim, and for the purposes of this suit is in the same position as the Nawab himself would be.3. The question between the parties turned out to be a matter of account; and in determining that question one point, which was raised by the plaintiff' was, that certain sums, which were admittedly paid by the defendant to the Government for revenue in the year 1284, and which the plaintiff ought to have paid himself, ought to be considered (as payment made by the defendant to the plaintiff), and as such might be appropriated by the plaintiff in discharge of the rent of the year 1283, which otherwise was barred by limitation. The plaintiff in this suit did not claim any rent for the year 1283.4. The Subordinate Judge was of opinion that the plaintif...
Tag this Judgment!Mothuranath Chattopadhya and ors. Vs. Dagai Dabee
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1883)ILR9Cal854
Cunningham, J.1. In this case the question raised is, whether the gift of a house in a case in which the donor reserved to himself the right of remaining in the house for the term of his life, and which was unaccompanied by any act of physical delivery, or any symbolical act by which physical delivery could be held to be implied, is valid.2. No case supporting the view of the respondent that such a gift is valid has been brought to our knowledge.3. In the present instance the donees appear to have never in any way had delivery of the house, and the only incident which can be regarded as symbolical of delivery is registration of the deed of gift.4. With regard to registration it was contended by the respondent that the Full Bench Ruling in Narain Chunder Cuckerbutty v. Dataram Roy I.L.R. 8 Cal. 597 had laid down that possession was necessary neither for a sale nor a gift. We find, however, that the learned Judges in that case confined themselves strictly to a case where there has been a...
Tag this Judgment!Akroomoni ChowdhraIn Vs. Lakhimoni Chowdhrain
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1883)ILR9Cal851
Cunningham, J.1. The order of the Sub-Registrar, which was the commencement of the proceedings out of which this suit has arisen, sets forth certain circumstances which occurred before him in connection with the application for registration. It then went on to state that Moheem, the person applying for registration, had stated that it was not his deed, and that he did not pay the fees on being asked for them. It then continued the deed has not agreeably to Section 42, Clause 7 of the rule in force been presented by a proper person, and the fees have not according to Section 66 been paid. Therefore, the registration of the deed is rejected.'2. From this order there was an appeal to the Registrar who passed the following order: 'The rural Sub-Registrar was right in refusing registration, as he was unable to satisfy himself that it had been presented by a person authorized to do so, and because the proper fee was not paid. Appeal dismissed.'3. It is contended on behalf of the appellant th...
Tag this Judgment!The Queen Vs. Arayi
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1883)ILR7Mad17
Charles A. Turner, Kt., C.J.1. A peon employed by the manager of an estate under charge of the Court of Wards is not a public servant within the meaning of that term in the Penal Code.2. The conviction for an offence punishable under Section 353 * of the Indian Penal Code cannot be sustained; but as the accused is shown to punishable under Section 352 of the Indian Penal Code, the Court will not interfere further thave committed an offence han to direct an amendment of the conviction and reduction of the fine to Rs. 10.* Revision Case 211 of 1883 referred by H. E. Stokes, Acting District Magistrate of Tanjore....
Tag this Judgment!Aubhoy Churn Bagchi Vs. Debendra Nath Shaw and anr.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1883)ILR9Cal905
Richard Garth, C.J.1. I have had some doubt whether we have any right to entertain this appeal; but after considering the authorities, I think an appeal lies.2. It is not easy (as observed by Jackson, J.), to ascertain precisely what was the decision of the Full Bench in the case of Sashti Charan Chatterjee v. Tarak Chandra Chatterjee 8 B.L.R. 315 but it seems to me that the majority of the Judges at least decided this that when an award has been made and judgment is given by the first Court in accordance with that award, the judgment is final--(see Section 325 of the old Code, corresponding with Section 522 of the present Code), but that when there is no award, that is no legal award, then the judgment of the first Court is open to appeal. It seems to follow from this, that when the question is, whether the award is a legal award or not, an appeal lies from the judgment.3. And that, as it seems to me, is the case here. The question raised is, whether the three arbitrators under the ci...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 171
- 172
- 173
- 174
- 175
- 177
- 178
- 179
- 180
- 181
- Next ›
- Last »