Chennai Court December 1951 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: M.K.P. Kadar Moideen, Manager M.K.P. Rice and Oil Mills Manjako ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-1951
Reported in: AIR1953Mad406; (1952)2MLJ195
ORDERRamaswami, J.1. This is a criminal revision case filed against the conviction and sentence of the Sessions Judge, East Tanjore in Cri. Ap. No. 11 of 1951 modifying the convictions and sentences of the Additional First class Magistrate, Negapatam in S. T. C. No. 142 of 1950.2. The accused has been convicted for certain offences under Factories Act, Sections 21 and 68, and fined on the assumption that the Mill which he runs is a factory and which is again on the footing that he employed 11 workers. The case of the appellant is that he employed only 8 workers and that another two included by the Factory Inspector to make up his 11 were watchmen and watchmen are not workers.3. The learned Sessions Judge held that the two watchmen are factory workers on the foot of the following reasoning.'According to Section 2(1) 'worker' includes a person employed not only in any manufacturing process or cleaning machinery or premises used therefor, but also a person employed in any other kind of wo...
In Re: Kadiam Satyam and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-1951
Reported in: AIR1954Mad271; (1952)IMLJ278
ORDERRamaswami, J. 1. This is a criminal revision case filed against the order made by the learned District Magistrate of West Godavari in C. R. P. No. 23 of 1950.2. The facts are: The petitioners before us were charged for offences under Sections 307 and 325 I. P. C. of having attempted to murder P. W. 1 and causing him grievous hurt. The learned Sub Magistrate after hearing prosecution evidence discharged the petitioners of the charge under Section 307 and directed that the trial should be proceeded with under Section 325 I. P. C. The case was converted from a P. R. enquiry into a calendar case.3. Thereupon the prosecution moved the learned District Magistrate of West Godavari, Mr. Gwynne and he came to the conclusion that the learned Sub Magistrate was not justified in dropping the charge under Section 307 and proceeding only with the offence under Section 325 and directed the committal of the accused to the sessions under Sections 307 and 325 I. P. C. Hence this revision petition.4...
Masum Vali Saheb and ors. Vs. Illuri ModIn Sahib
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-1951
Reported in: AIR1952Mad671; (1952)1MLJ611
Chandra Reddi, J.1. This second appeal has come before us as it was referred to a Bench by one of us, having regard to the divergence of Judicial opinion on the main point involved in the appeal.2. Defendants 1 to 8 are the appellants in this second appeal. The facts, so far as is necessary to appreciate the question involved in the second appeal, may be briefly stated:3. The suit house originally belonged to Khasim Peeran. This was built by him on a portion of a plot of land shown as A B C P E F G in the plan attached to the plaint. In the family division amongst the brothers, the site, on which the suit house is built, was allotted to Khasim Peeran and, subsequently, he built thereon the suit house. In discharge of a dower debt, Khasim Peeran transferred this house to his wife, Basiri Bibi. Basiri Bibi, in her turn, sold this house to the plaintiff in or about the year 1941 for a consideration of Rs. 250. After the death of Khasim Peeran, a creditor of his filed a suit on the foot of...
M. Gopalakrishna Menon Vs. K.P. Vellakutty
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-06-1951
Reported in: AIR1953Mad399; (1952)2MLJ34
Subba Rao, J. 1. The question raised in the second appeal is one of implied surrender of a lease. The plaint schedule items of property were owned by the kanoor tarwad. In the partition, that was effected between the members of the tarwad, the said items were set apart to the share of Chamukutti Nair. The plaintiff, who was holding the said items under a prior lease, attorned to him. There was an agreement between the plaintiff and Chamukutti Nair, in and by which the plaintiff was allowed to continue in possession of the properties on a rental of 334 paras of paddy from 1940-31. On 16-2-1943, the plaintiff executed a pattomchit, Ex. P. 1, where-under the rent payable was fixed at 264 paras of paddy. Meanwhile, the defendant, who obtained an assignment of the decree obtained against Chamukutti Nair, attached the said properties, brought them to sale and purchased them on 19-3-1945 and took delivery on 30-8-1945. It may bo mentioned that the attachment was prior to the date of Ex. P. 1....
Madura Labour Union and Anr. Vs. Madura Mills Workers' Co-operative St ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-06-1951
Reported in: (1954)ILLJ457Mad
ORDERGovinda Menon, J.1. The Madura Mills Workers' Co-operative Stores, Ltd., is a society registered under the Madras Co-operative Societies Act (Act VI of 1932) on 23 December 1939 and it started work on 9 January 1940. Though originally the membership was about 300, all of whom were members of the Madura Labour Union, which was a union registered under the Trade Unions Act of the workers of the Madura Mills, at present according to the affidavit, the society has a membership nearing 12,000. Under by-law No. 5 of the Madura Mills Workers' Co-operative Stores, Ltd., the Madura Labour Union, as a registered body, was admitted as a member of the society and according to by-law No. 19 the executive management of the affairs of the society was to vest in a board of directors of not more than five of whom one should be the nominee of the Madura Mills Company, Ltd., and another a nominee of the Madura Labour Union. By-law No. 20 provides for the election of the directors by the general body...
Raja Jagaveera Ramamuthu Kumara Venkateswara Etappa Naicker Ayyan Aver ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-06-1951
Reported in: AIR1953Mad892; (1952)IIMLJ708
1. This batch of second appeals arises out of a batch of suits filed by the appel-lant-zamindar of Ettiyapuram under S. 77, Madras Estates Land Act, to recover arrears of land rent and tree tax due from the several defendants in the several suits who held the land and the trees under pattas granted to them. There was no dispute about the land cist, and the controversy was only in respect of the right of the landholder to claim tree-tax. The case of the landholder so far as the tree-tax was concerned was on a two-fold basis, viz., custom and contract. The custom pleaded was that the trees were held on lease separately & distinct from the land & they were the property of the landholders irrespective of whether they stood on the holdings of ryots or outside them and irrespective of whether they came into existence before or after 1908. This custom was denied by the ryots, but both the trial court and the learned District Judge on appeal have held that there was a valid & enforceable custo...
In Re: Ravipati Sitaramayya
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-05-1951
Reported in: AIR1953Mad61; (1952)1MLJ652
1. This is a case, which has given us anxious consideration. Appellant, a man aged 43, has been found guilty under Section 302 I. P. C. of the murder of his 17 year old wife, Balakotamma, by strangling her to death during the night of 29-5-1950 in his house in Vetapalam village in which there were admittedly no other inmates. The next morning appellant asked a washerman (P. W. 7) to take a message to his wife's uncles, P. Ws. 1 and 5 and her maternal uncle and foster father P .W. 6 who all lived at Vadlamudi, a village -'three miles away to the effect that she was found lying speechless and unconscious in his house. On receipt of this message at 7 A. M. P. Ws. 1, 5 and 6 hastened to Vetapalem and found Balakotamma lying dead on a cot.According to P. W .1, appellant when questioned first made no reply and then denied knowledge of anything. There were no visible injuries on the body. Suspecting that appellant and his concubine one Subbamma had poisoned her, they made a complaint to this ...
In Re: M. Malayandi thevar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-05-1951
Reported in: AIR1952Mad576; (1952)1MLJ408
ORDERRamaswami, J.1. These are four criminal revision cases filed against the orders of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tuticorin, in summary cases Nos. 289, 292, 290 & 176 of 1951, holding that the prosecutions launched against the criminal revision petitioners were competent and maintainable.2. There can be no dispute on the limited records before us at this stage concerning the facts, namely, that these petitioners did not comply with Clause 3(2) of the Madras Food Grains (Intensive Procurement) Order, 1950, & the Collector's notification dated 15-7-1950 for surrender of surplus food-grains to the Government, and for which the petitioners have been charged under the Madras Food-grains (Intensive Procurement) Order, 1950, read with Section 7(1) of the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, XXIV (24) of 1946.3. The point taken by them in the lower Court and here is set out by the criminal revision petitioners as follows: The Collector has no power by a District Notification to call...
The Lotus Industrials, Kallai, Malabar by Sole Proprietor Mr. Velayudh ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-05-1951
Reported in: AIR1952Mad715; (1952)1MLJ532
Rajamannar, C.J.1. This is an application for the issue of an order in the nature of a prohibition directing the Government of Madras to forbear from enforcing any system of rationing of yarn with regard to some only of the consumers and to issue an order in the nature of a writ of 'mandamus' directing the Government of Madras to distribute yarn allotted to the Madras State equally between all the consumers in proportion to the looms employed by them. The affidavit in support of this application is filed by one M. Velayudha Menon representing the two petitioners, namely, (1) The Lotus Industrials, Kallai, Malabar, of which he is the sole proprietor, and (2) the Calicut Handloom Owners' Association of which he is the Honorary Secretary.2. Distribution of yarn in this State is made under the Cotton Textiles (Control) Order, 1948, by officers specially appointed for the purpose. Clause 30 of that Order directly relates to the distribution of yarn. It runs as follows:'The Textile Commissio...
Narapureddigari Narayanareddi and ors. Vs. State and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-05-1951
Reported in: AIR1952Mad821; (1952)IIMLJ7
ORDER1. This is a petition filed against the order of committal made by the learned District Magistrate, Nandyal, as against the order of discharge made by the Sub Magistrate of Cuddapah in P. R. C. No. 2 of 1951.2. The short facts are: There is a bitter faction in the village of Bidinemacherla in Pulivendla Taluk between two parties headed by P. W. 1 and accused 1. There have been several criminal cases between them and security proceedings were launched against both the parties. On 17-3-1950 the security case stood posted before the Sub Divisional Magistrate of Jammalamadugu at Pulivendla Camp.3. The case for the prosecution is that accused 1 and his partisans deliberately absented themselves from this hearing and that while the opposite party was at the camp, formed themselves into an unlawful assembly numbering about 100 and armed at about 8 A.M. and that they trespassed into the house of prosecution witnesses 1 to 4 and caused damage to, the property and caused hurt to prosecution...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »