Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 31 (0.33 seconds)

Kandasami Pillai vs Rangasami Nainar (Died) And Ors. on 26 July, 1912

46. While dealing with the question as to, whether the attestations of the next presumptive reversioners are sufficient proof, under the circumstances, of their consent to and ratification of the alienations of the respective properties, the Madras High Court considered the ordinary course of conduct of Indians, when they take attestation from a person having interest in the property. The decision reported in Kandasami Pillai v. Rangasami Nainar (1912) 23 M.L.J. 301, at p. 306 is relied upon, wherein, it is said that, "having regard to the ordinary course of conduct of Indians in this Presidency, attestation by a person who has or claims any interest in the property covered by the document must be treated prima facie as a representation by him, that the title and other facts relating to title, recited in the document, are true and will not be disputed by him as against the obligee under the document."
Madras High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

Ratnamma W/O.B.K.Jayaramireddy,40 ... vs The Revenue Divisional Officer, ... on 24 July, 2015

58. The Ratnamma Vs. Revenue Divisional Officer, Dharmavaram, Annathapur District and others relied upon by the petitioners deals with Officer within [thirty days] from the date of such acquisition, and the said Mandal Revenue Officer shall give or send a written acknowledgement of the receipt of such intimation to the person making it:
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 25 - Cited by 96 - S V Bhatt - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next