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
Mantharavadi Suryanarayana and ors. Vs. Merugu Venkatadu and ors.
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1949)1MLJ520
Panchapagesa Sastri, J.1. C.M.A. No. 648 of 1946 is a transferred appeal from the Court of the District Judge of Kistna. It was C M.A. No. 66 of 1945 there. It was an appeal preferred by the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 46 of 1944 on the file of the Sub-Court, Masulipatam, against an order returning the plaint for presentation to the proper Court on the ground that the Sub-Court had no jurisdiction to try the suit. The suit was to recover a sum of Rs. 1,502-9-0 claimed as damages for use and occupation of the suit property belonging to the plaintiffs in the village of Cherichintala, Kistna district, by the defendants for faslis 1350-52. CM.A. No. 649 of 1946 is also a transferred appeal, which was C M.A. No. 67 of 1947 in the District Court, Kistna. That also was an appeal filed by the plaintiffs, in O.S. No. 53 of 1943, Sub-Court, Masulipatam, against an order returning the plaint for presentation to the proper Court. The suit was to recover a sum of Rs. 3,355-14-0 claimed as damages for us...
Tag this Judgment!Kanamathareddi Seethamma Vs. Kanamathareddi Kotareddi and anr.
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1949)1MLJ593
Horwill, J.1. On 19th August, 1935, the decree-holder in O.S. No. 527 of 1930 attached the six items of property with which we are now concerned and a few other items in E.P. No. 383 of 1935. When the property was posted for sale on 13th July, 1936, the mother of the judgment-debtor intervened end claimed in her application, E.A. No. 1250 of 1936 (Ex. P-3), that she had been given a maintenance charge over these six items in a suit brought by her for that purpose (O.S. No. 349 of 1932) on the file of the District Munsiff's Court of Ellore). Four days before E. A. No. 1250 of 1936 was filed, the decree-holder and another filed a suit representing the general body of creditors for a declaration that the charge decree obtained by the mother of the judgment-debtor was collusive and not binding on the creditors and that the property already purchased in execution of the decree in O.S. No. 527 of 1930, as well as the items under attachment, were not therefore liable for her maintenance. On 1...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Hashem and anr. Vs. Balahari Mondal and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1952Cal380
R.C. Mitter, J.1. One Maraful Huq was the owner of 9 bighas 11 cottas odd land comprised within premises, which were formerly numbered as Nos. 125, 126, 127, 128 & 130 Tollygunge Circular Road & No. 1 Durgapore Lane. The said premises have now been re-numbered as Nos. 62 Alipore Road & 42 Raja Santosh Road. He died leaving the plff. & 'pro forma' defts. 7 to 18 as his heirs. As a result of a partition between the said heirs which came into effect on 4-3-1944 the said premises fell to the share of the plff. alone.2. On 16-4-1916, one Ramdas Das executed a 'kabuliat' in respect of the said premises in favour of the said Maraful Huq. The lease was for a term of ten years commencing from Pous 1321. Ramdas was already on the greater portion of the lands so demised by virtue of an earlier lease, & had already built a rice mill there. After the expiry of the term of the lease he held over as a yearly tenant. This is accepted before us by both parties. By two successive court-sales the tenancy...
Tag this Judgment!In the Goods of Borendra Nath Mitter and Sudhirendra Nath Mitter Vs. A ...
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1952Cal418
Banerjee, J.1. The application is for an administration 'pendente-lite' touching a Will-The power to grant such administration is conferred on the Court by Section 247, Succession Act.2. The words 'may appoint' in the sections indicate that the Court has a discretion in the matter. That discretion is judicial & not arbitrary, to be exercised on established principles of law.3. This section replaces Section 34, Probate & Administration Act of 1881. It is based on the Court of Probate Act, 1857, 20 & 21 Vict., C. 77, Section 70 & is substantially in the same words. The English decision therefore, are authorities on the question under consideration. In any event, they may be relied on for the exercise of a sound discretion under this section.4. But before I consider the decisions under the statute, I turn to the earlier English decisions, for the principle on which that discretion was exercised before the Statute. I read only the leading cases.5. In 'King v. King' (1801) 6 Ves 172. opposi...
Tag this Judgment!L. Jagannath Prasad Vs. Ram Chandra and ors.
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1952All408
Desai, J. 1. This is an application moved by Jagannath Prasad for committing four persons, Ram Chandra, O. P. 1, Brahmanand Sharma O. P. 2, Brijmohan Lal O. P. 3, and Mithan Lal O. P. 4, for contempt of the Court of the Civil Judge, Aligarh.2. Jagannath Prasad, Brijmoban Lal and Mithan Lal are real brothers but separate from one another. Ram Chandra is the son of Brij Mohan Lal; it is alleged by Jagannath Prasad that they are joint with each other, but the allegation is denied by them. A certain dispute which had arisen between Jagannath Prasad and Brij Mohan Lal was referred to the arbitration of Mithan Lal, another person with whom we are not concerned, and Jwala Prasad, Jwala Prasad being the umpire. The nature of the dispute referred to arbitration is in controversy; according to Jagannath Prasad it was in respect of rent of a godown which had been let out by him to Brij Mohan Lal, while according to Brij Mohan Lal it was in respect of certain ornaments worth Rs. 9,000 which had be...
Tag this Judgment!Chandra Bali Prasad and ors. Vs. Rex
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1952All795
ORDERKidwai, J. 1. This is an application in revision by four persons, Kunwar Chandra Bali Praaad, Kunwar Ambika Prasad, Kunwar Madho Ram and Kunwar Raghuraj Prasad who have been convicted under Section 23, Northern India Ferries Act, and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 40/- each. 2. The facts are that there exists a ferry known as Aira Ferry in the district of Kheri. This is used by persons desirous of crossing the river Drra. Formerly the river Urra flowed through the portions of village Aira and Nawapur. Now, however, by a change in its course the river flows only through village Nawapur. Mansadin, contractor who obtained the contract for Aira Ferry from the Aira Estate, continued to ply this ferry and used the land of village Nawapur on both banks of the river Urra for the purposes of the ferry. A suit was consequently brought against him and others in the civil Court, claiming possession of the land in village Nawapur, for mesne profits and an injunction directing Mansadin not to p...
Tag this Judgment!Ponna Viyyanna Sarma Vs. Reddi Manikyam and anr.
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1949)1MLJ468
Govinda Menon, J.1. The petitioner seeks to revise the order of the Subordinate Judge of Rajahmundry passed in I.A. No. 756 of 1946 in O.P. No. 34 of 1928 on his file.2. A sum of Rs. 1739-13-3 has been deposited in Court, as compensation for acquisition of land which belonged to the husband of Reddi Manikyam, the first respondent to this petition, and which was in her possession. But since the estate held by her was only a widow's estate, the amount could not be paid over to her without the necessary safeguards. Thereupon, the petitioner, in this revision petition applied to the lower Court stating that he was willing to mortgage his property as security and receive the amount in Court deposit, for which interest at the rate of Re. 0-11-0 per cent, per month would be paid to the widow every year from the 20th March, 1930 onwards. He has been paying the amount regularly until sometime before the filing of the Interlocutory Application which has given rise to this Civil Revision Petition...
Tag this Judgment!Matleb Sk. and ors. Vs. the King
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 1949CriLJ1001
Harries, C.J.1. This is an appeal by ten per. sons who were tried by a learned Assistant Sessions Judge and a jury upon a charge under Section 304, Penal Code, read with Section 149 Penal Code. It is to be noted that there was no charge framed under either Section 147 or Section 148, Penal Code.2. Eventually the jury returned a verdict of guilty of an offence under Section 325 read with Section 149, Penal Code against all the appellants, and an offence under Section 328, Penal Code against appellants Nos. 6,7, 8 and 9. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge accepted this verdict and sentenced each of the appellants to 4$ years' rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 125 read with Section 149, Penal Code, and passed no separate sentence against the four appellants convicted under Section 823, Penal Code.3. The case for the prosecution was that at about 10 p. m. on 9th March 1948, the appellant Apel Shaikh rushed into the house of the com-plainant Ainal Shaikh driving before h...
Tag this Judgment!Rajlakshmi Dasi W/O Tulsi Charan Das Vs. Sm. Susilabala Dasi and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1950Cal351
R.P. Mookerjee J.1. This is an appeal on behalf of defendant 4 in a suit brought by the plaintiff for declaration of her title to the disputed lands and for recovery of khas possession thereof.2. The only material question in issue in this appeal is whether Rajlakshmi Dasi, defendant 4, has got a subsisting right of tenancy or not. It will not be necessary to go into the series of litigations in respect of this holding but we may limit ourselves to the relevant facts pertinent for a decision of the only point which is raised in this appeal. The holding in question originally belonged to three brothers Krisha, Rakhal and Tulsi. The plain-tiff Sushilabala is the daughter-in-law of Krishna. Defendant 2, Sashi, is the son of Bakhal and defendant 4, the appellant before this Court, Rajlakshmi, is the wife of Tulsi. In 1929, the landlords obtained a rent decree against the three brothers in respect of arrears of rent due in respect of this holding. In the execution proceedings which followed...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Ambica Textiles Ltd.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1950Cal491,54CWN157
Sinha, J.1. This matter has come before me for settlement of the list of debts and claims. 2. The Company was incorporated on 5th April 1945. The Company never carried on any business nor was any commencement certificate taken. Certain applications were made for shares in the Company and a total sum of Rs. 78,750 was paid to the Company by intending shareholders. The money received from the shareholders was deposited with the Central Bank of India Ltd., Clive Street Branch, a sum of Rs. 445-14-0 has since accrued as interest on the said deposit. 3. As the promoters of the Company found it difficult to commence business of the Company, at a meeting held on 10th March 1947 it was resolved that the share money received from the applicants should be refunded in full to the respective applicants. It was also resolved that the Central Bank of India be requested to honour the cheques in respect of such refund by debiting the current account of the Company. The Central Bank of India, however, ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 6672
- 6673
- 6674
- 6675
- 6676
- 6678
- 6679
- 6680
- 6681
- 6682
- Next ›
- Last »