Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.22 seconds)
Gangadara Ayyar And Ors. vs Subramania Sastrigal And Ors. on 26 March, 1946 cites

M.L.M. Ramanathan Chetti vs V.K.N.S.P. Subramanian Chetti And Ors. on 30 April, 1926

In Ramanathan Chetti v. Subramanian Chetti (1926) 51 M.L.J. 295 the appeal was dismissed in its entirety, but a memorandum of objections filed by the respondent was allowed to the extent of Rs. 300. The appeal involved a pure question of fact. It was held that the memorandum of objections was in effect a cross appeal and as the decree of this Court affirmed the decree of the trial Court in so far as the defendant's appeal was concerned, no leave to appeal could be granted.
Madras High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 11 - Full Document

P.R.M.P.R. Perichiappa Chettiar vs Nachiappan on 16 October, 1930

In Perichiappa Chettiar v. Nachiappan (1930) 35 L.W. 206, a similar decisin was given by Reilly and Ananthakrishna Aiyar, JJ. That was a suit for accounts against an agent. The plaintiff valued his relief at Rs. 40,000. The trial Court gave him a decree for Rs. 5,682. The defendant appealed to the High Court and the plaintiff preferred a memorandum of cross objections, claiming a decree for a further sum of Rs. 20,000. This Court allowed the defendant's appeal in part and reduced the amount decreed by the trial Court by some Rs. 4,000. It allowed the memorandum of cross objections to the extent of only Rs. 150. On an application by the plaintiff for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council it was held that this Court's decree had varied the decree of the trial Court to his prejudice and as the subject-matter of the suit in the trial Court and in the appeal to the Privy Council was upwards of Rs. 10,000, he was entitled to a certificate.
Madras High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 11 - Full Document
1