Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.23 seconds)
A.R.A.R.S.M. Arunachallam Chetty vs C. Jagannatha Pillai on 18 August, 1926 cites

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

Two cases are quoted in 28 M.L.J.: Kuttia Pillai v. Ranganadham [1915] 28 M.L.J. 323 and Ramanatham Chetti v. Subramanyam Chetti [1915] 28 M.L.J 372. I think it is quite clear on the authority of these cases that the plaintiff in this suit being a surviving member of a joint Hindu family can sue and take the benefit of the promissory note given to the managing member in respect of moneys advanced by the managing member out of the joint family funds.
Madras High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 11 - Full Document

P.M.A. Muthiah Chetty vs P.V. Kothandaramaswami Naidu on 7 August, 1916

I was referred to a decision in Muthiah Chetty v. Kothandaramaswami Chetty [1916] 31 M.L.J. 347 but that seems to me to be somewhat in conflict with the Calcutta decision and as this decision was a decision prior to the decision in the Calcutta case and moreover as the Calcutta case is a decision of the Privy Council I am bound by that, I need not follow this decision.
Madras High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 4 - Full Document
1