HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr0617 and id is 1 raw text is: XII MOORE IND. APP., 202 MUTTUSAWMY JAGAVERA YETTAPPA NAICKER
funded, or otherwise dealt with as justice may require. Tl~eir Lordships think, that
the Appellants are entitled to the ordinary costs of this appeal; but they are of
opinion, that those costs ought not to have been swollen, by the severance, in defence
of the four persons representing the original Mortgagees, and the presentation of
two distinct appeals. They will direct the Registrar to tax these costs accordingly.
By the Order in Council made on the appeal, it was ordered, that the decree of the
late Sudder Dew'anny Adawlut at Calcutta, of the 28th June, [202] 1862, be reversed,
except so far as it reversed the decision of the Court below, and that it be declared
that the mortgage, lease, and agreement mentioned in the plaint, and there alleged
by the Plaintiffs to constitute one mortgage security, did constitute that one security,
that the Mortgagees were the Lall Defendants, and the Defendant, Roy Rain Kishen
Doss, was only their Agent, and had no interest in the lease or agreement distinct
from that of the Mortgagees, who are accountable, as Mortgagees in possession, to the
Plaintiffs in this suit for all moneys received by them in respect of the rents and
profits of the mortgaged property, by virtue of the lease; that the three instruments
were entered into with a view to evade the usury laws, by a device or mean, within
the meaning of the 9th section of Regulation XV. of 1793, and that the Plaintiffs
were, and are, entitled to redeem, at any time, though before the expiration of the
twenty years' term created by the Lease, on payment or satisfaction of all that may
be due on the mortgage securities for principal money, interest, and costs, such
i,itrest to be calculated at twelve per cent. ; but that it appearing that the Plaintiffs
have failed to prove that the mortgage debt, with interest and costs, had been
satisfied at the time of the institution of the suit, the suit is to be dismissed without
costs, and the decree of the Zillah Court, of the 20th of May, 1859, for the flismissal
of the Plaintiffs' suit, restored, so far only as to include that Order of dismissal,
with the declaration and alteration above stated, and with a view to the due enforce-
ment of this Order, Her Majesty is further pleased hereby to direct the High Court
to remand the cause to the Court below, and to [203] order the decree of dismissal
simply to be restored, with the above declaration and alteration; and that each
party are to pay their own costs of the appeal to the Sudder Court, hereby partly
reversed; and that any costs of such last appeal as may have been decreed and paid,
and which are inconsistent with this Order, are to be refunded, or otherwise dealt
with as justice may require.
[See Rajah, Suttosurrun Ghosal v. Moheschunder Mitter, 1868, 12 Moo. Ind. App.
263; Wige v. Juggobundhoo Bose; 1869, 12 Moo. Ind. App. 477.]
MUTTUSAWMY JAGAVERA YETTAPPA NAICKER, Zemindar of Yetteyapooram,
-Appellant; VENCATASWARA YETTAYA,-Respondent * [Dec. 2, 1868].
On appeal from. the ligh Court of dudicature at Madaras.
Suit by illegitimate Son of a deceased Zemindar, one of the Soodra class, by a
Dasi, or dancing girl, kept in his Zenana as his Concubine, and recognized
.by him as his Son, against the Zemindar in possession, for maintenance out
of the income of the Zemindary. The Civil Court recognized the Plaintiff's
title, and directed the payment of Rs. 2500 for maintenance out of the
private property of the late Zemindar. The High Court, on appeal sus-
tained the Court's decree, but did not determine, whether the maintenance
was a charge on the zemindary, or on the private estate of the late Zemin-
dar :-Held, on appeal:-
First, that, as the Son was recognized by his natural Father, it was not
* Present :-Members of the Judicial Committee-The Right Hon. Lord Chelms-
ford, the Right Hon. Sir James William Colvile, the Right Hon. the Lord Justice
Wood, and the Right Hon. the Lord Justice Selwyn. Assessor,-The Right Hon.
Sir Lawrence Peel.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0617&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)