Chennai Court November 1949 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: Mrs. B. Gervase
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-17-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Mad599
ORDERPanchapakesa Ayyar, J.1. The petitioner, in this case, Mrs. Gervase, has been convicted by the Fifth Presidency Magistrate, Madras under Section 188, Penal Code, for disobeying the orders of the Collector of Madras dated 16th April 1948 and 22nd April 1918 (EXS. P-l and P-4), under Section 3 (2), Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1946, and has been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-, or, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a week. She is the landlady of 'Satya Bhavan,' premises No. 29 Sir Mohamed Usman Road, Thyagarayanagar. These premises fell vacant on 31st March 1948, and the petitioner did not notify the said vacancy as required by Section 3 (1), Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, XV [15] of 1946. On 9th April 1948, the vacancy was noticed by P. W. 1, the Accommodation Inspector for Thyagarayanagar area, and the Accommodation Tahsildar, and the fact was brought to the notice of the Collector of Madras who, thereupon, sent a memo, dated 9th...
The Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. S.R. Subramanya Pillai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-17-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Mad626; [1950]18ITR85(Mad)
Viswanatha Sastri, J.1. The question of law that has been referred by the Appellate Tribunal is in these terms : 'Whether in the circumstances of this case as found by the Tribunal, the respondent (assessee) is entitled in law to the deduction of the two sums of Rs. 658 and Rs. 5049 in his assessment for 1943-44.'2. The assessee, a book-seller, seeks to deduct these two sums of Rs. 658 and Rs. 5049 in the computation of his profits for the assessment year 1943-44 in the following circumstances. During a period of about 37 days ranging from 13th July 1939 to 20th August 1939 the assessee and one Lakshmana Aiyar jointly borrowed from sundry money-lenders and a Co-operative Bank, a sum of Rs. 16,200 out of which a sum of Rs. 10,450 was taken and utilised by the assessee for hi business needs and the balance of Rs. 5750 was taken by Lakshmana Ayyar. The joint borrowing of the assessee and Lakshmana Aiyar was necessitated by the business needs of both the borrowers and by the instance of mo...
In Re: Guli Venkataswami
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-16-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Mad309
ORDERPanchapakesa Ayyar, J.1. This is a petition for setting aside the order of the District Magistrate, Anantapur, setting aside the discharge of the petitioner, who was accused 1 in P. K. C. No. 6 of 1948 on the file of the Stationary Sub-Magistrate's Court, Anantapur, under Section 209, Criminal P. C., and directing the petitioner to be committed to the Court of Session. Anantapur, under Section 437, Criminal P. C., to stand his trial for offences under Sections 302 and 380, Penal Code, or, in the alternative, for an offence under Section 201, Penal Code.2. The prosecution case was briefly this. Komati Thimmakka, a lonely Vysya widow of sixty years, was eking out her livelihood by running a petty shop in Atmakur village, Anantapur district. She was wearing a gold nanu (necklace) worth Rs. 250 for years and had it on her even on the night of 27th February 1948, according to P. Ws. 3 and 9 her brother and his wife. That night, after she had closed her shop and gone to bed, five person...
In Re: M. Subramaniam Detenu No. 1169 in the Central Jail
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-16-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Mad405
Govinda Menon, J.1. This is an application by one M. Subramaniam who had been repatriated from the Federated Malay States, by an order of that Government, as he was a citizen of the Indian Union. Arriving in Madras by 'S.S. Rajula' on 26th December 1948, he was arrested after disembarkation and kept in remand till 7th January 1949, on which day an order of detention dated the previous day, was served on him and he was detained under the provisions of Madras Maintenance of Public Order Act. The reasons for detaining him, dated 19th January 1949, were served on him on 12th February 1949. He files his application on 26th March 1949 and it comes up for final disposal before us now.2. Belying on certain observations in two judgments of the Bombay High Court reported in In re Krishnaji Gopal : (1948)50BOMLR175 , and In re Pandurang Govind, : AIR1949Bom84 the learned advocate for the petitioner contends that the activities of the petitioner in a foreign country should not be taken into consid...
In Re: Ramakudumban and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-16-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Mad408
ORDERPachapakesa Ayyar, J.1. The three petitioners have been convicted under Section 160, Penal Code, of affray, and sentenced by the First Class Bench, Tenkasi, to pay fines of RS 5/- each, or, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three days each. The facts are simple. At 1.30 P.M. on 15th July 1948 the petitioners beat in a public place one Masilamani, a washerman, who tamely submitted to the beating without the least retaliation, and simply howled in pain. Mr. Vedamanickam for the petitioners, relies on the wording of Section 160, Penal Code and on the ruling of Pandrang Row J. in Rami Reddi v. Narasa Reddi, A. I. R. 1938 Mad. 924 : (1938) Cri. L. J. 86 and urges that the petitioners ought not to have been convicted under Section 160, Penal Code as there was no fight, so essential to an affray, which is only a 'little war', whatever the case might have been if the petitioners had been charged under Section. 352 or 323, Penal Code. I agree. A war and an affray both require ...
K. Mahammad Ghouse Sahib Vs. Jamila Bi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-16-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Mad433
Subba Rao J.1. This is an appeal against the order of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Vellore in I. A. No. 391 of 1946. The appeal was filed on the assumption that the said order was a final decree in O. S. No. 41 of 1943.2. One Kaka Abdul Aziz Sahib died on or about 21st February 1943. The plaintiff is his widow. Defendant 1 is his uterine sister. Defendants 2 to 8 are his father's children by the second wife. Defendant 9 is his sister's son, i.e., the son of defendant 1. The suit was filed for partition and for possession of the plaintiff's one-fourth share in the properties left by her husband and also for rendition of accounts in regard to the business carried on by the deceased. On 25th September 1944, a preliminary decree for partition was passed in the suit. On 22nd April 1946 defendant 1 filed I. A. No. 391 of 1946 for the passing of the final decree. That application was opposed by the plaintiff and the other defendants mainly on the ground that subsequent to preliminary...
V. Ramaswami Ayyangar and K.R. Subramania Ayyar, Vs. the Commissioner ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-16-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Mad454; [1950]18ITR150(Mad)
Satyanarayana Rao, J.1. Two questions were referred to us by the Appellate Tribunal under Section 66 (1) of the Income-tax Act. They are;'(a) Whether on the facts of the case the sum of Rs. 453 being overdrawings of an employee against his salary should be treated as an irrecoverable loan of the applicants' money-lending business within the meaning of Section 10 (2) (xi), Income tax Act, when that amount was not realisable after the death of such employee ?(b) Whether the sum of Rs. 84,388 paid by the applicants to the Ceylon Government as interest under Section 46 of the Ceylon Ordinance I [1] of 1938 for default of paying Estate duty is allowable as a deduction either under Section 10 (2) (iii) or 10 (2) (xii), Income-tax Act ?' (Note:-- Section 10 (2) (xii) in the question has now been enacted as 10 (2) (xv) by Section 3. Income tax Amendment Act, 1946) The sum of Rs. 453 referred to in the first question represents an amount of overdrawings by one of the employees of the assessee o...
The Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. S.N.N. Sankaralinga Ayyar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-15-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Mad610; [1950]18ITR194(Mad)
Satyanarayana Rao, J.1. This reference raises a very plain question, viz., whether in the circumstances and on the facts of this case, the two sums of Rs. 18,991 and Rs. 105 received by the respondent as Managing Directors' remuneration and Director's sitting fees from the Indo Commercial Bank could be said to be a part of the income of the Hindu undivided family of which he was the karta. 2. The assessment was made on the basis that the family of which Mr. Sankaralinga Aiyar was the karta or the manager was an undivided Hindu family. For the assessment year 1943-44 Mr. Sankaralinga Aiyar claimed that the remuneration of Rs. 18,991 which he received as the Managing Director of the Indo Commercial Bank and a sum of Rs. 105 which he received as Director's sitting fees, were his personal earnings and not property belonging to the undivided Hindu family of which he has been the head and the manager. The only circumstance relied on behalf of the Commissioner of Income-tax to declare these t...
Korapolu Shedthi Vs. Gangayya Shetty (Died) and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-15-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Mad656
1. The decree-holder is the appellant. He obtained a mortgage decree on 8th January 1937 in O. S. No. 5 of 1934 on the file of the District Munsif'a Court of Karkal. That decree was scaled down under Madras Act IV 4 of 1938 and an appeal against that amended decree was dismissed on 16th January 1940. The decree-holder thereafter filed R. E. P. No. 411 of 1941 for execution of the decree. That was on 26th March 1941. The judgment-debtors filed R. E. A. No. 602 of 1941 in the said E. P. No. 411 of 1941 on 25th August 1941, and they pleaded that there was an adjustment of the decree as a result of which, the decree was not to be executed for a period of three years, and thereafter payment of a smaller sum should be accepted in complete satisfaction. They also filed a counter to the main execution petition reiterating the same objections which they had set forth in their own application R. E. A. No. 602 of 1941. The executing Court decided against the judgment-debtors and dismissed their a...
Sri Rajah K.V. Narasimha Rao Bahadur, Zamindar of Aswaraopet Vs. Commi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-15-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Mad808; [1950]18ITR181(Mad)
Satyanarayana Rao, J.1. The following question was referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench:'Whether on the facts and circumstances of this case the finding of the Bench that the appellant is at resident within the meaning of Section 4-A (b), Income-tax Act is tenable in law?' The assessee is a Hindu undivided family whose manager is Rajah Kandimalla Venkatarama Narasimha Rao Bahadur, the Zamindar of Aswaraopet. He is a permanent resident of Aswaraopet in the Nizam's State. For the accounting year 1938-89 he was asked to pay income-tax on a total income of Rs. 14,630 which consisted of Rs. 180 being interest accrued in money-lending business. Out of Rs. 19,000 being the net sale proceeds of paddy, net grazing fees and net sale proceeds of tobacco, allowing the statutory deduction of as. 4500, the balance of Rs. 14,500 was treated as income from sources other than agricultural income from outside British India to which the interest from money-lending business wa...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »