Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 29 (0.36 seconds)
Asmath Kathu vs Lal Khan on 10 September, 2008 cites

K. Hutchi Gowder vs H. Bheema Gowder on 6 January, 1959

In Hutchi Gowder v. Bheema Gowder, 1959-2 Mad LJ 324: (AIR 1960 Mad 33) the question was whether a covenant of further assurance should be enforced by directing the defendant to execute a release deed or a deed of conveyance, and the Court held that the defendant should execute a deed of conveyance. These decisions do not lay down that a deed styled a deed of release cannot, in law, transfer title to one who before the transfer had no interest in the property."
Madras High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 26 - Full Document

The Chief Controlling Revenue ... vs Rm. L. Rm. L. Lakshmanan Chettiar on 5 January, 1970

Hence, according to Mr.Venkataswami, the learned Government Pleader, to bring the document within the ambit of a 'release' both the releasor and the releasee must have a pre-existing right in the property released. As far as the present case is concerned, both the releasor and the releasee are separate juristic entitles and the releasee which is a public limited company has no pre-existing right in the properties sought to be released under the deed. The learned Government Pleader cites the decision reported in Chief Controlling Revenue Authority v. Rm.L.Rm.L.Lakshmanan, AIR 1970 Mad 348 (FB) to which one of us was a party. In this decision, the Full Bench has specifically held as follows(at p.349)-
Madras High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 12 - Full Document
1   2 3 Next