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
Sri NaraIn and ors. Vs. Gur Charan Lal and ors.
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1950All177
1. One Mt. Rajeshwari filed a suit for maintenance against 6 sets of defendants out of whom we are concerned only with 5 sets in this appeal. These 5 sets of defendants were: (1) Jugal Kishore, (2) Sri Narain, Prem Narain and Jagat Narain, (3) Kali Prasad, Kali Fragana and Kali Nath, (4) Sheo Prasad, Durga Prasad and Brahma Narain and (5) Rameshwar Prasad, Raj Narain, Ram Narain and Mahraj Narain. Mt. Rajeshwari's suit was decreed in the year 1924 against all the 6 sets of defendants and the amount of the decree was made a charge on the immovable property belonging to all of them. The whole amount in respect of the decree was realised by Mt. Rajeshwari from Jugal Kishore alone. Jugal Kishore obtained a suit for contribution against the remaining sets of defendants and obtained a preliminary decree on and December 1930. In this decree the amount due from sets Nos. 2 to 6 was shown separately from the amount due from set No. 6. The final decree in Jugal Kishore's suit was passed on 8th N...
Tag this Judgment!Gulzar Ahmad Jafri Vs. Government of United Provinces
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1950All212
Malik, C.J.1. Gulzar Ahmad Jafri, the appellant, was a Sub-Inspector of Police in the United Provinces and was appointed as such by the Inspector-General of Police on 28rd October, 1931. On 3rd October 1938, he was suspended by the Superintendent of Police, Jaunpur, on a charge of having demanded and accepted illegal gratification. On 20th July 1939, charges were framed against the appellant in accordance with certain rules made under the Police Act and an enquiry was held by a Board, consisting of the Deputy Inspector-General of Police and two Superintendents of Police. There is no complaint about the procedure followed at the enquiry. The appellant appeared before the Board, and the Board, ultimately, after considering the materials placed before it held that the charges were proved and the appellant was dismissed from service under orders of the Deputy Inspector. General of Police dated 18th August 1980. The appellant appealed to the Inspectors-General of Police who dismissed the ap...
Tag this Judgment!Fakir Mohammad Vs. King
Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1952Ori87
Ray, C.J. 1. This arises out of a rule issued against an order of conviction passed by theSub-Divisional Magistrate, Ghumusur Divisionand confirmed by the learned Sessions Judge of Ganjam. The conviction is under Section 7 of the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946 (Act No. XXIV (24) of 1946), for purported contravention of an order purporting to have been passed under Section 3 of the Act by the Sub Divisional Magistrate of Ghumsur Division. (I do not like to discriminate between Sub Divisional Magistrate and Sub-Divisional Officer as both the terms are understood as meaning the same officer.) The order was to the effect that the petitioner should supply a certain quantity of paddy at certain price. The petitioner's defence was that he had not the requisite stock with him. In this respect, the finding is against him. The finding has, no doubt, been arrived at in the most queer manner. It has been said he possesses so many acres of lands and each acre must have or might hav...
Tag this Judgment!Suresh Chandra Pradhan Vs. Ganesh Chandra De and ors.
Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1951Ori351
Jagannadhadas, J.1. The pltf. is the applt. in this second appeal. It arises out of a suit for specific performance of a contract for the sale of 35 decimals of laud which belonged to defts. 1 & 2. Defendants 1 & 2 are minors & the suit-contract is one entered into on their behalf by their mother as guardian. The contract was for sailing the property for a sum of Rs. 75 out of which Rs. 35 was paid as advance & the balance was to be paid later. Defendant 3 who is the sister's husband of defts. l & 2 has purchased the suit property on 3-2-1943 subsequent to the agreement in favour of the pltf. The genuineness of the consideration alleged to have bean paid thereunder were denied by the defts. & contested in the Cts. below. It has been found by the trial Ct. that the agreement was true & that a sum of Rs. 35 was paid as an advance under it. It was also found that the agreement was executed in order to raise money to repay a decretal debt for Rs. 60 against the minors in respect of which t...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: T. Ethirajulu Naidu
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad145
ORDERSomasundaram, J.1. The accused has been convicted by the Chief Presidency Magistrate under Section 4 (l) (a), Madras Prohibition Act and sentenced to pay a fine of RS. 50.2. The accused is a carpenter and in his carpentry shop a jar containing two gallons of varnish was found. This varnish contains denatured spirit and therefore it comes within the definition of liquor in the Act. The lower Court finds that the liquid is not drinkable and is not fit for consumption. The question is whether the accused is guilty of an offence under Section 4 (l) (a) of the Act. The object of the Act as the preamble shows, is to prohibit the consumption of intoxicating liquor. It is not suggested that the varnish is intended for drink or can be used for intoxicating purposes. Being a carpenter, the possession of varnish was for a legitimate use. P. W. 1, the Prohibition Officer, says that if it is varnish he would not have seized it. The finding of the lower Court is that it is varnish. The Governme...
Tag this Judgment!Bhagavathula Venkatachalapathi Vs. the Province of Madras, Represented ...
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad211
ORDERMack, J.1. The petitioner who applied for a succession certificate seeks to revise an order by the learned District Judge, Guntur, directing him to pay stamp duty on the aggregate amount of debts and securities for which the certificate was applied rejecting his contention that he should pay stamp duty under Schedule 1, Article 12, Court-fees Act on the individual debts. Schedule 1, Article 12 prescribes a stamp of 2 per cent. 'on the amount or value or any debt or security specified in the certificate', if less than Rs. 5000, and 3 per cent. on the amount or value of any debt or security to which the certificate is extended.2 There is no Madras decision on this point. My attention has been drawn to a ruling by the learned Master of the High Court in 1937 in which following the Bench decision of the Luck-now High Court in Pirthwi Nath Bhargawa v. Triloknath Bhargawa ; he took the view that stamp duty was payable on the individual debts and securities and not on the aggregate. It i...
Tag this Judgment!T.R.K. Ramaswami Servai and anr. Vs. the Board of Commissioners of the ...
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1951Mad473; (1950)2MLJ511
Satyanarayana Rao, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 84 (3), Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act (II [2] of 1927), as amended by Madras Act X [10] of 1946, against the order of the learned District Judge dismissing the appellants' petition under Section 84 (2) of the Act.2. The facts relating to this matter have been fully set out in the judgment of my learned brother which he is about to deliver find which I had the advantage of perusing, and therefore, need not be set out in great detail. One Venkataswami Servai executed on 18-3-1920, a deed of gift (EX. R-2) declaring that he had already endowed nineteen acres, ninety-eight cents of nanja land to Alagarswami temple devasthanam and that the temple was already under construction. He also expressed in that document his intention to have the deity Alagarswami installed in the building which was then under construction and to have kumbabhishekam performed after completion of the building. Under this deed he appointed two trustees, b...
Tag this Judgment!Bhagavathula Venkatachalapathi Vs. the Province of Madras Represented ...
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1949)2MLJ632
Mack, J.1. The petitioner who applied for a succession certificate seeks to revise an order by the learned District Judge, Guntur, directing him to pay stamp duty on the aggregate amount of debts and securities for which the certificate was applied rejecting his contention that he should pay stamp duty under Schedule I, Article 12 of the Court-Fees Act on the individual debts. Schedule I, Article 12 prescribes a stamp of 2 per cent, 'on the amount or value of any debt or security specified in the certificate ', if less than Rs. 5,000, and 3 per cent, on the amount or value of any debt or security to which the certificate is extended.2. There is no Madras decision on this point. My attention has been drawn to a ruling by the learned Master of the High Court in 1937 in which following the Bench decision of the Lucknow High Court in Pirthwi Nath Bhargava v. Estate of late Triloknath Bhargava I.L.R.(1934)Luck. 196, he took the view that stamp duty was payable on the individual debts and se...
Tag this Judgment!Srinivasa Mudaliar Vs. Abraham Pillai
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad824
ORDERBasheer Ahmed Sayeed, J.1. This civil revision petition is filed against the order of the District Judge of West Tanjore dismissing the petition of the petitioner herein praying that he may be impleaded as an appellant in A. S. No. 15 of 1947, which arose out of O. S. No. 206 of 1943. The petitioner is the legatee under a will executed by the appellant in A. S. No. 15 of 1947. The appellant in A. S. No. 15 of 1947 had filed a suit O. S. No. 206 of 1943 on the file of the District Munsif's Court, Tiruvadi, for dissolution of partnership and for accounts against one Abrahim Pillai and eight others. In the said suit the present petitioner's predecessor-in-interest who was plaintiff claimed that she was a partner in a rice mill along with defendant l in the suit, and that the partnership was started with the plaintiff and defendant 1 as partners they being entitled each to a moiety of the business, each having contributed a sum of as much as Rs. 1052/- and odd. Defendant 1 paid the pl...
Tag this Judgment!Yalamanchilli Venkataramiah Vs. Garikipati Janapaiyya and anr.
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad831
Raghava Rao, J.1. The defendant in a suit for damages for malicious prosecution is the appellant before me in this second appeal. The malicious prosecution alleged pertains to certain proceedings under Section 144, Criminal P. C., initiated by the defendant against one Ramabrahmam and certain others with reference to an obstruction which he alleged had been caused to him in the matter of his possession of the property that had been contracted to be sold to him by Ramabrahmam. It would appear that on 31st May 1943 the appellant obtained the ex parte order that he sought in the proceeding under Section 144 which he had initiated by then. On 4th June 1943, four days after the date of the ex parte order, a settlement took place between the appellant and Ramabrahmam by which he was enabled to sell the properties to one Sobhanadri for a higher price than had been agreed to be paid by the defendant and had been in fact paid by him, Certain of the other persons against whom the proceedings had...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 6750
- 6751
- 6752
- 6753
- 6754
- 6756
- 6757
- 6758
- 6759
- 6760
- Next ›
- Last »