Chennai Court November 1947 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Vithalji Madhavji Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-10-1947
Reported in: AIR1948Mad353; [1948]16ITR43(Mad)
GENTLE, C.J. - This is a case stated, at the instance of the assessees, by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal pursuant to section 21 of the Indian Excess Profits Tax Act, 1940 (hereinafter, called 'the Act') which incorporated in the Act the provisions of section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Two questions of law are referred to the Court, namely :-'(1) Whether in the circumstances of the case the Bench was right in holding that the appeal from an order by the Excess Profits Tax Officer lay to the Tribunal only ?(2) Whether the Tribunal was right in the circumstances of this case in holding that the appeal filed by the appellants against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was misconceived and whether the consequent dismissal of the appeal by the Tribunal was right in law ?'The case requires elucidation of the meaning and effect of some provisions of the Act, the relevant portions of which it is convenient to set out. They are the following :-'Section 10A (1). - W...
Pallamreddi Audemma Vs. Pallamreddi Varadareddy and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-07-1947
Reported in: (1948)1MLJ30
Govindarajachari, J.1. These two appeals arise out of a suit for maintenance filed on 5th December, 1940 by the appellant in A.S. No. 262 of 1945, against her. step-son who is the appellant in A.S. No. 393 of 1945, and his paternal grand-mother who was the second defendant in the suit. The plaintiff asked for future maintenance at the rate of Rs. 720 per year, arrears of maintenance at the same rate restricted however to the consolidated amount of Rs. 4,000 and a provision for expenses of plgrimage estimated at Rs. 280. She also alleged that some of her jewels valued at Rs. 1,500 were with the defendants, and she prayed for their delivery or payment of their value. The learned Subordinate Judge of Nellore who tried the suit decreed the plaintiff's claim for maintenace at Rs. 360 per annum. He decreed arrears at the same rate but limited to three years prior to the suit. The claim for jewels or their value was negatived. Rs. 280 were directed to be paid to the plaintiff towards expenses...
In Re: Bijjili Papamma and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-07-1947
Reported in: AIR1948Mad471; (1948)1MLJ116
ORDERYahya Ali, J.1. I entirely agree with the view that the District Magistrate has taken in this case. The only circumstance pressed for consideration is that, admittedly, the petitioners stated at the earliest stage to the Circle Inspector that they knew nothing about the offence. But, it is said, that that was because of the threats held out by the accused in this case. Subsequently when statements under Section 164, Criminal Procedure Code, were recorded the witnesses spoke to have witnessed the occurrence and gave details. It is alleged that that was on account of pressure of ill-treatment by the police. The District Magistrate has pointed out in his judgment that there is no evidence to show that they were in fact beaten or threatened.... Apart from that circumstance the statements made under Section 164, Criminal' Procedure Code and before the committing Magistrate are irreconcilable. It is obvious therefore that the petitioners should have made one of those statements knowing ...
A. Narayana Nair Vs. the Secretary, Triplicane Urban Co-operative Soci ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-05-1947
Reported in: AIR1948Mad272; (1948)1MLJ331a
Satyanarayana Rao, J.1. This is a revision petition by the plaintiff against the judgment of the Full Bench of the Small Causes Court, Madras, in N.T.A. No 203 of 1945, dismissing an application for new trial.2. The suit was instituted for recovery of Rs. 97-1-0 from the defendant, the Secretary, Triplicane Urban Co-operative Society Ltd., as damages for wrongful dismissal. The plaintiff was employed by the defendant society as driver of motor car on a monthly salary of Rs. 28-0-0 plus allowances but was dismissed on the 6th April, 1945, according to the plaintiff, wrongfully and without any just cause. The defendant in the pleas filed on his behalf maintained that the dismissal of the plaintiff was for good and sufficient cause as he was constantly absenting himself from work without leave and was shirking work and that the jurisdiction of the Civil Court was barred under Section 51 of the Madras Co-operative Societies Act. The question of jurisdiction was disposed of as a preliminary...
Janab E.M. Ghulam Dastagir Saheb Vs. Marudai Pillai and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-03-1947
Reported in: AIR1948Mad409; (1948)1MLJ344
Bell, J.1. The petitioner was one of two defendants in a suit in the District Munsiff's Court, Tanjore, to eject him from possession of certain land. The second defendant in the suit was the Tanjore Municipal Council.2. The first defendant had been for some years the holder of a lease, from the Council, of the land in question. It was a registered lease and valid in every respect. It came to an end by effluxion of time on 31st March, 1946. He had begun negotiations previously for renewal and by resolution, dated 16th January, 1946, the Council agreed to grant him a new lease for three years from 1st April, 1946 to 31st March, 1949. This resolution was confirmed by a Government memorandum, dated 21st May, 1946. Thereafter this Government order appears to have been cancelled and the Council believing that they had no authority to grant any lease to the petitioner, therefore determined to put up the lease of this land for auction in the ordinary way. On 12th April, 1947, the Council, havi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›