Perundevitayar Ammal Vs Nammalvar Chetti and Another
.... nt of the law by Pothier runs thus:" Where a man deposits money in the hands of another, to be kept for his use, the possession of the custodee ought to be deemed the possession of the owner, until an application and refusal, or other denial of the right; for, until then, there is nothing adverse, a ...
Madras High Court
Kota Perundavitayar Ammal Vs Rottala Nammalwar Chetti and Another
.... y Pothier runs thus "where a man deposits money in the hands of another, to be kept for his use, the possession of the custodian ought to be deemed the possession of the owner, until an application and refusal, or other denial of the right; for until then there is nothing adverse, and I conceive tha ...
Madras High Court
Shib Chunder Mukerjee and Another Vs Anand Lal Paria and Others
.... the decision of the Settlement Officer must be one u/s 106, because there is no other section of Chapter X under which it can come; and (2) that, if it does not do so, it cannot come under any section of Chapter X at all, and then the Special Judge can have had? no jurisdiction to hear an appeal fr ...
Calcutta High Court
Kunhappa Nambiar and Another Vs Shridevi Kettilamma
.... zinamah, dated 1877, and a karar or parti- tion-deed, dated March 1882, the lands of the tarwad had been divided and the lands now in question had been allotted to the plaintiff''s branch of the tarwad. The second appeal came on for hearing on the 10th of December 1894 before Muttusami Ayyar ...
Madras High Court
Muhammad Husain Vs Badri Prasad
.... copy of the Assistant Collector''s judgement that it was decided on the 26th of August 1879. From that judgment it appears that the defendants to that suit raised a plea similar to that which is now put forward, namely, that the plaintiff had never received any portion of the profits. The Assistant ...
Allahabad High Court
Ramhari Sahu and Others Vs Madan Mohan Mitter
.... garded as an application u/s 588 of the Code. It would seem from the terms of the decision that was pronounced by this Court on the 13th instant in Letters Patent Appeal No. 6 of 1895 that it was so regarded, but as we were two of the Judges who delivered that decision, we may say that this point wa ...
Calcutta High Court
Somasundaram Ayyar and Others Vs Fischer
.... urchase of the property by the plaintiffs'' father. 4. In this view we do not consider it necessary to dwell upon the letter A and the proceedings taken by respondent on the promissory note which was given in first defendant''s name by plaintiffs'' father for the consideration amount. 5. It is ...
Madras High Court
Somasundram Aiyar and Others Vs Robert Fischer
.... rly the purchase of the property by the plaintiffs'' father. 5. In this view we do not consider it necessary to dwell upon the letter A and the proceedings taken by respondent on the pronote which was given in 1st defendant''s name by plaintiffs father for the consideration amount. 6. It is ne ...
Madras High Court
Lakhmi Chand Vs Ballam Das
.... ly 1888 was made the decree against the respondent was alive. It is true that upwards of three years had elapsed between the date of that and the date of the present application; but this is due to no fault or laches of the attaching creditor, but to this fact that the proceedings in execution were ...
Allahabad High Court
Seth Shapurji Nana Bhai Vs Shankar Dat Dube
.... The Court which passed the decree having decided who is to be regarded AS the legal representative, it is for the Court executing the decree to decide as to the extent of that legal representative''s liability. I draw this inference from the use of the words "the Court which passed the decree" in t ...
Allahabad High Court
Get In Touch With Us
We are here to help. Want to learn more about our services? Please get in touch, we'd love to hear from you!