Chennai Court March 1948 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.
In Re: K.S. Doraiswami Iyer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-12-1948
Reported in: (1948)2MLJ116
ORDERGovinda Menon, J.1. This is an application to quash the four charges framed against the petitioner, by the Additional (First Class Magistrate of Ranipet in C.C. No. 231 of 1947 on his file. The first of these charges relates to an offence under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code in that the petitioner, between 1st May, 1946, and 1st June, 1946, at Arkonam, with a person who is the second accused in the Court, below, agreed to do an illegal act, viz., hiring out the military vehicles entrusted to the petitioner for allotting to the Sub-Divisional Officers for military works, to P.W. 2, a civilian building contractor, and that the same act, viz., the hiring out of the military lorries to the private contractor, having been done in pursuance to an illegal agreement the petitioner hereby committed an offence of criminal conspiracy. The next three charges relate to cases of criminal breach of trust by a public servant, viz, the petitioner, in that he as Sub-Divisional Officer, M.E....
In Re: the French India Central Transport, Limited
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-11-1948
Reported in: AIR1948Mad497; (1948)1MLJ401
Rajamannar, O.C.J.1. This is an application for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the records of the Central Road Traffic Board, Madras, and quash its order, dated 22nd January, 1948, purporting to allow an appeal by N.V. Bashyam Reddiar and cancelling the order passed in favour of the petitioners by the Regional Transport Authority, Vellore. The subject-matter of this application is a transport service from Cuddalore to Pondicherry, and the petitioners, applied on 1st October, 1946, for permits to run two buses on that route. On 21st July, 1947, the Regional Transport Authority permitted the petitioners to run two buses on the route for a period of four months. On the expiry of the period covered by these permits again on 3rd December, 1947, two temporary permits were issued for the period from 4th December, 1947 to 3rd April, 1948. Meanwhile, one Bashyam Reddiar, proprietor of another transport service, preferred an appeal to the respondent Board against the decision of t...
In Re: Pedda Muni Reddi and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-11-1948
Reported in: AIR1948Mad472; (1948)1MLJ377
ORDERGovinda Menon, J.1. The learned Public Prosecutor, at the very outset, conceded that the conviction and sentence of the second accused cannot be sustained on the evidence in the case, for, on the finding that there was no arrest effected, there can be no overt act attributable to him which would justify a conviction under Section 353 of the Indian Penal Code. His conviction and sentence are therefore set aside and he is acquitted.2. With regard to the first accused, it is contended on his behalf by Mr. T.M. Venugopala Mudaliar that in view of the finding by the lower appellate Court to the effect that the second accused was not actually arrested, the proper manner of looking at the case is to find out whether the head constable was justified in attempting to arrest. It is common ground, that the Sub-Inspector of Police had not given an order in writing in accordance with the provisions of Section 56(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code to P.W. 1 to arrest the second accused. Though t...
B. Rangaswami Naidu Vs. Vummidi Bangaru Chetty and Sons and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-10-1948
Reported in: (1948)2MLJ82
ORDERP.V. Rajamannar, Officiating C.J.1. In this application, the petitioner seeks from this Court a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the Chief Judge of the Court of, Small Causes, passed in House Rent Control Appeal No. 852 of 1947 on the 18th February, 1948. The petitioner is the tenant of a shop in Devaraja Mudali Street, in George Town, Madras, and it is common ground that the respondents should be treated as his landlord for the material period. The respondents applied before the Rent Controller for an order evicting the petitioner on the ground that the shop occupied by him was wanted for their own use. On the 2nd December, 1946, the Rent Controller passed an order directing the petitioner to put the respondents in possession of the premises on or before 1st March, 1947. The petitioner filed an appeal against the order to the Chief Judge of the Court of Small Causes, who allowed the appeal and dismissed the application of the respondents on 12th March,. 1947. On the 17th ...
The Coimbatore Transport Ltd. Vs. the Governor-general in Council
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-05-1948
Reported in: (1948)1MLJ407
Rajamannar, O.C.J.1. This is an appeal from the order and judgment of Clark, J., in a petition filed by the Income-tax Officer, Special Circle, Coimbatore, to wind up the appellant company viz., The Coimbatore Transport Ltd., a private Company registered under the Indian Companies Act. On an objection taken by the appellant, the Governor-General in Council was substituted in the place of the Income-tax Officer as petitioner. The debts on which the petition was founded were due in respect of income-tax and excess profits tax for the year 1941-42 and 1942-43. With a penalty of Rs. 3,200 the total amount due exceeded Rs. 30,000. There appears to have been a slight reduction in the amount payable on account of a subsequent decision of the Appellate Tribunal but it is not disputed that a very large sum is lawfully due and payable as and for the taxes above mentioned.2. The only ground on which the petitioner sought a winding up order, at the trial, was that the company was unable to pay its...
The Public Prosecutor Vs. Kupandra Chetty
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-05-1948
Reported in: AIR1948Mad478; (1948)1MLJ468
Govinda Menon, J.1. Under Section 417 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the Public Prosecutor, Madras, appeals against the acquittal of the respondent of an offence under Rule 28 framed under Clause (b), Sub-section (2) of Section 20 of the Madras Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and under Section 5(1)(d) of the said Act.2. The prosecution case is that P.W. 1, the Health Inspector at Kallakurichi, went to the shop where the respondent was at about 8 a.m., on 15th October, 1946, and wanted a sample of ghee from him. The respondent gave the ghee and received 5 annas being the price. This ghee was tested and found to contain 94 per cent. of fat not derived from milk or cream and thereafter the prosecution was instituted. The defence of the respondent was that he was not, the owner of the shop where the ghee was offered for sale, that he did not sell the ghee and therefore he was not guilty of any offence. The lower Court found that the shop wherein the ghee was exposed for sale and sol...
The Coimbatore Transport Ltd., Coimbatore Vs. the Governor-general in ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-05-1948
Reported in: [1948]16ITR169(Mad)
RAJAMANNAR, Offg. C.J. - This is an appeal from the order and judgment of Clerk, J., in a petition filed by the Income-tax Officer, Special Circle, Coimbatore, to wind up the appellant company, viz., The Coimbatore Transport Ltd., a private company registered under the Indian companies Act. On an objection taken by the appellant, the Governor-General in council was substituted in the place of the Income-tax Officer as petitioner. The debts on which the petition was founded were due in respect of income-tax and excess profits tax for the years, 1941-42 and 1942-43. With a penalty of Rs. 3,200 the total amount due exceeded Rs. 30,000. There appears to have been a slight reduction in the amount payable on account of a subsequent decision of the Appellate Tribunal but it is not disputed that a very large sum if lawfully due and payable as and for the taxes above-mentioned.The only ground on which the petitioner sought a winding-up order, at the trial, was that the company was unable to pay...
Thikka Surya Rao and ors. Vs. Sirangu Sathiraju and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-04-1948
Reported in: AIR1948Mad510; (1948)1MLJ396
ORDERGovinda Menon, J.1. In proceedings under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code in M.C. No. 11 of 1946 on the file of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Amalapuram, it was declared under Section 145, Clause (4) and (6) that P.W. 5 was having possession of the disputed land through his agent P.W. 1 ever since delivery was given to him on 7th October, 1945 and that he had been having such possession, of the land on 15th May, 1946 when the preliminary order was passed.2. The petitioners in this Court were respondents 1 to 3 in the lower Court and on their behalf Mr. V.T. Rangaswami Ayyangar raises a question regarding the validity of the order of the lower Court on the ground that the Magistrate who pronounced the order in Court, on the 6th January, 1947 did not conduct the inquiry or pass orders but had only pronounced an order written and signed by his prede-cessor on the 4th January, 1947. It was Mr. K. Kondal Rao, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, who heard the evidence and passed orders with...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›