Chennai Court April 1952 Judgments
In Re: M. Thomas by Father and Natural Guardian S. Masilamani
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-21-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Mad21; (1952)2MLJ450
Rajamannar, C.J. 1. The petitioner in this application is a minor aged about 13 years and the affidavit filed in support of the petition has been filed on his behalf by his father and natural guardian. The petitioner is an Indian Christian, but claims to be a Harijan. The petitioner is studying in Form I in the Hindu High School, Madurantakam which is a State-aided school. His father applied on his behalf to the Manager of the school for a grant of a full school-fee concession; but his request was not complied with and the manager of the school drew the attention of the petitioner's father to a note under appendix 17 (A) of Rule 92 of the Madras Educational rules. The effect of this note can be understood only by a reference to the substantive provision in the Madras Educational Rules, in particular Rule 73 and Rule 92. Under Rule 73 of these rules, it is inter alia provided that boys belonging to the classes and castes specified in Appendix 17 (A) may be admitted without the payment o...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Margaret Jean Massy Westmorland Wood Vs. Colonel Granville Alric ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-18-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Mad313; (1952)2MLJ758
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff in O. Section No. 162 of 1948 on the file of the Subordinate Judge of the Nilgiris at Ootacamund against the dismissal of her suit. The plaintiff is the owner of lands and premises known as Niton Estate which contains a tea plantation and is situated in Kotagiri in the District of the Nilgiris. The plaintiff demised the said estate to the defendant under a lease deed dated 1st July 1945 (Ex. A. 1). The lease was for a period pf ten years. The annual rental was fixed at BE. 1800 to be paid in four instalments of Bs. 450 each in advance on or before the 1st July, 1st October, 1st January and 1st April each year. Besides the estate, a small house used for the occupation Of the writer was also let out to the defendant at a monthly rental of Rs. 5. The lease contained both covenants by the lessor and covenants by the lessee. It was provided 'inter alia' in the lease that in case of breach or nonperformance of any of the covenants and conditions containe...
Tag this Judgment!C.V. Rajagopalachariar Vs. Rajagopalan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-18-1952
Reported in: AIR1954Mad357; (1953)IMLJ134
Ramaswami, J.1. Two points are taken in the civil miscellaneous second appeal, viz., that the lower court should have held that the plea of the respondents was barred by the principle1 of constructive 'res judicata' and secondly, that in any event the appellant before me should be refunded the proportionate share of the purchase money (i. e., three-fourths).2. In my opinion, both the points taken are bound to fail. Turning to the first point, what is the constructive 'res judicata' pleaded? The argument runs that since the petitioners in the lower court did not object at the settlement of the proclamation of sale to the sale of this property as property liable to be sold in execution of the decree against the late Viswanatha Aiyar, or advance the claim that no sale could be valldly held as far as their shares or interests (viz, three-fourths) were concerned, they are barred from agitating; the matter any further under the rule of construc-tive 'res judicata'. In advancing this argument...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. D.M. Alexander Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-15-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Mad166; [1952]22ITR379(Mad)
1. The two questions that were referred to this Court were:1. Whether there are materials for the Tribunal to come to the conclusion that the sum of Rs. 3,00,000 received by Captain T. P. M. Alexander by the sale of Cottangady estate in excess of its purchase price was a revenue receipt. 2. Whether in the circumstances of the case for the proper ascertainment of the profits and gains in respect of raising and selling coffee, tea and other produce of the estate, the Tribunal was right in upholding the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in taking into consideration the value of the produce which remained on hand unsold at the end of the year of account. The accounting year, was 1-4-1942 to 31-3-1943, and the year of assessment was 1943-44.2. It is better to deal with each question separately, as the sets of facts necessary for answering each question are different.3. The facts necessary for considering the points raised by the first question are as follows. Though the asses...
Tag this Judgment!R. Venkataswamy Naidu, Peelamedu, Coimbatore Vs. the Commissioner of I ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-15-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Mad223; [1952]22ITR276(Mad); (1952)2MLJ520
1. The question that has been referred to us under Section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act runs: 'Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the income from the sale of milk received by the assessee during the accounting year is not 'agricultural income' within the meaning of the Income-tax Act,' The accounting year of the assessee ended with 31st March 1946. The assessment year was 1946-47. The assesses, an undivided Hindu family, owned about 70 acres of agricultural land at Perur near Coimbatore. The family also owned 65 cows & 10 pairs of bulls. With reference to the cows the statement of the assessee furnished to the Income-tax Officer was: 'The cows are purely pasture-fed and not stall-fed. It is not being run as a commercial proposition. The cows are maintained purely for manuring and other purposes connected with agriculture and only surplus milk after satisfying assessee's needs is sold to outsiders.' During the year of account,- the assesses received about Rs. 28,0...
Tag this Judgment!P.S. Narayanaswamy Vs. the State of Madras, Represented by the Chief S ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-15-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Mad228; (1952)2MLJ375
ORDERRamaswami, J.1. This is a civil revision petition filed against the order made by the learned Subordinate Judge of Ootacamund in I.A. No. 335 of 1950 in O. S. No. 74 of 1949. 2. The facts are: The petitioner P.S. Narayanaswami before us was employed in the Chinchona Directorate located at Ootacamund. He has been dismissed from service. Thereupon, he has filed the suit O. S. No. 74 of 1949 against the State of Madras. This former dismissed employee wanted the production of a considerable quantity of unpublished official records. Therefore, summons was issued to the Director who is the head of this department. He looked into the records asked to be produced. Then he has filed an affidavit classifying the records sought to be produced under two heads, viz., those in regard to which he claimed privilege on the ground that the disclosure of those documents would be prejudicial to public interest and those which might be disclosed. The records were sent to court with an affidavit. The l...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Gajalakshmi Ginning Factory Ltd., Palladam Vs. the Commissioner of ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-15-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Mad343; [1952]22ITR502(Mad); (1953)IMLJ35
1. Two questions have been referred to this Court for decision by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 66 (1) of the Act. They are:1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the inclusion and assessment of the sum of Rs. 9397 representing the sale proceeds of plots of land, by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner after remand and upheld by the Appellate Tribunal, when this amount had not formed the subject matter of the appeal in respect of assessment year 1944-45 either before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner or the Appellate Tribunal in the first instance, is legal?2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the assessment of the sum of Rs. 13197 realised by the sale of vacant plots and fruit shop buildings under the head "business" is lawful?2. The assessee is Sri Gajalakshmi Ginning Factory Ltd., Palladam, hereinafter called the "company". The company purchased in 1032 a ginning factory with extensive lands appurtenant to the factor...
Tag this Judgment!Asher Textiles Ltd., Tiruppur Vs. Commr. of Income-tax and Excess Prof ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-14-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Mad20; [1952]22ITR125(Mad); (1952)2MLJ291
Satyanarayana Rao, J.1. The question referred to this court for decision is a simple one, namely,'whether the valuation of the closing stock is to be made on the basis adopted by the assessee company.'To bring out the method adopted by the asses-see for valuating the closing stock a simple illustration may be given. Suppose he had purchased goods at Rs. 500 cost price and if such goods remained unsold at the end of the accounting year, applying the well known principle of commercial accountancy, the assessee adopted the market value (say for example Rs. 300) of the goods on that date as it was lower of the two values, namely, the market value and the cost price. Having done that in valuing of the closing stock he correctly adopted that value of Rs. 300 as the value of the opening stock for the succeeding year. But at the end of the succeeding accounting year instead of again applying the principle, that he should have valued the closing stock either at the market value or the cost pric...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Ravu Janardhana Krishna Ranga Rao Bahadur Vs. the State of Madras ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-14-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Mad185; (1952)2MLJ243
1. The petitioner is the younger brother of the Zamindar of Bobbili, the third respondent. In the affidavit filed in support of the petition he states that he is a junior coparcener of the joint family which owned the ancient and impartible estate of Bobbili which was notified under the Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act of 1948 with effect from 7th September 1949, that on the date when this estate was so notified the joint family consisted of the petitioner, the third respondent, the fourth respondent the son of the third respondent and the male descendants of the petitioner himself, that after the estate was taken over by the Government the Government deposited in the office of the Estates Abolition Tribunal, Vizianagaram (second respondent) on 30th March 1950 a sum of Rs. 8,17,445 towards advance compensation under Section 41 of the Act and a further sum of Rs. 58371 under Section 50 of the Act on 14th July 1950, that on and from the notified date the Madras...
Tag this Judgment!Commr. of Income-tax, Madras Vs. G.M. Dandekar of M.K. Dandekar and Co ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-10-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Mad152; [1952]22CompCas356(Mad); [1952]22ITR235(Mad); (1952)IIMLJ493
1. This is a reference under Section 21 Chartered Accountants Act (Act XXXVIII of 1949). The respondent is a partner in firm of Chartered Accountants. Messrs. A. Mohamed and Co. are a firm of merchants carrying on business in hardware in the City of Madras and they entrusted the work of auditing their accounts and preparing income-tax returns to the respondent's firm. The complaint against the respondent is that he performed this work negligently.2. It appears from the assessment order dated 31-10-1944 that Messrs. A. Mohamed and Co. had considerable business in black-market and maintained two sets of accounts -- regular day books and ledgers for the open market transactions and a separate book for the black market transactions. While the former accounts contained entries showing daily transactions the latter contained only consolidated entries made at the end of each week, of all the transactions of that week. At the end of the financial year all the weekly entries in the separate acc...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »