Chennai Court April 1952 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.
The Public Prosecutor Vs. Ustepalle Swami Chetty and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-10-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Mad196; (1952)2MLJ184
Somasundaram, J.1. This is an appeal by the State against the acquittal of the respondents herein on the ground that no proper sanction has been accorded for the prosecution of the accused for offences under Sections 76 and 131, Companies Act.2. A complaint was laid against the respondents by the Assistant Registrar at the instance of the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies for the said offences. Under Section 248 (2), Companies Act 'The Central Government may appoint such registrars and assistant registrars as it thinks necessary for the registration of companies under this Act, and may make regulations with respect to their duties.'In pursuance of this power, the Central Government has made certain regulations and we are concerned here only with Regulation 14(a) and (b). Regulation 14(a) says:'The Registrar may in his discretion institute such enquiries or make such investigation in respect of any matter as may in his opinion toe necessary for the proper performance of his duties and ...
Doddi Dorayya Vs. Bathula Adinarayana
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-10-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Mad183; (1952)2MLJ359
Subba Rao, J.1. This second appeal arises out of O. S. Wo. 68 of 1947 on the file of the District Munsifs Court, Vizagapatam, a suit filed by the appellant to direct the defendants to put him in possession of the plaint schedule property and for a declaration that the entire amount due under the usufructuary mortgage dated 22nd July 1873 was completely discharged.2. To appreciate the contentions of the parties, it is enough to state the relevant facts. The plaintiff, alleging to be the owner of the equity of redemption and also the purchaser of two-thirds of the mortgage interest in the aforesaid mortgage, filed the said suit for redemption and for possession of the plaint schedule properties. The plaintiff's case is that he is an agriculturist and that, if the provisions of the Madras Agriculturists'- Relief Act are applied to the debt, the debt would be discharged. The defendants contended, inter alia, that the plaintiff is not an agriculturist and that the suit is premature. They al...
The Corporation of Madras by Its Commissioner Vs. Mr. A.D. Charles, th ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-10-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Mad357; (1952)2MLJ247
Ramaswami, J. 1. This is an appeal preferred against the decree and judgment of the learned City Civil Judge of Madras in O. S. 784 of 1949. 2. The facts are : In the city of Madras there is a well known club known as the Madras club extensively patronised by Europeans, consisting of about 400 members. This club is governed by its own byelaws and administered by a Committee. Among the amenities provided by the club is provision for food and lodging in the manner stated in the bye-laws and on payment of charges specified by the appropriate authorities of the club. Food--breakfast, lunch and dinner -- is supplied only to members of the Club. They are free, however, to introduce guests, provided they are over 21 years of age and are of accepted social standing. The wife of a member may, as his guest, stay or take food in the Club even when he is himself not present, but, otherwise, no guest is served with food except in the company of the member who introduces him. No payment is accepted ...
V.S. Subramania Chettiar and anr. Vs. State of Madras Represented by t ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-10-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Mad943; (1953)2MLJ568
Krishnaswami Nayudu, J.1. This appeal is against the judgment in O. P. No. 51 of 1949 of the Subordinate Judge of Vellore on a reference under Section 19, Land Acquisition Act 1 of 1894 in respect of acquisition of certain lands belonging to the appellants.2. The appellants were the owners of lands of the extent of 8 acres and 40 cents in Kalinjur village near Vellore town, North Arcot district. By notifications made in October 1948, and published in the Gazetts, the Government notified the land as one which would be acquired. The land is in proximity with the Katpadi Veliore Cement road. Notices under Sections 9(3) and 10, Land Acquisition Act were issued calling upon the appellants to put in a statement in writing showing the nature of their interest in the lands and the amount of compensation for such interest with particulars and to appeal in person on 30-11-1948 before the Special Deputy Collector for Land Acquisition, Vellore. The appellants acquired the lands somotime in 1946 fo...
Raghupathula Subbayamma and ors. Vs. Raghupathula Venkata Rao
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-1952
Reported in: AIR1954Mad92; (1952)IIMLJ183
ORDERSomasundaram, J.1. As pointed out by Pandrang Row J. in -- 'Kishta Pillai v. Amirthammal', AIR 1938 Mad 833 (A), in a case of maintenance under Section 488, Criminal P. C., where the husband makes allegations that the wife was living in adultery and makes that his defence to refuse the claim of the wife for maintenance, the husband ought to begin the case and let in evidence of unchastity so that the wife may re-hut it. In this case no such opportunity has been given to the wife to rebut the case of the husband. The order of the lower court is set aside and the case remained to the lower court for fresh disposal according to law....
R. Hanumanthappa and Son Vs. the Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Mad209; [1952]22ITR364(Mad); (1952)2MLJ742
1. The question that was referred to us for our decision is : 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the inclusion of a sum of Rs. 2,46,407 for the assessment year 1944-45, and Rs. 1,03,935 for the assessment year 1945-46 representing remuneration derived by the Managing Agency of the Devangere Cotton Mills Ltd., Devangere, in the total income of the assesses family is lawful.'2. The assesses is a Hindu undivided family. The only question that arises for consideration in this reference is, whether the income derived by Hanumanthappa and his son under the Managing Agency agreement with the Devan-gore Cotton Mills Co., entered into on 15-3-1937 should be included in the total income of tha assesseo under Section 16 of the Act. Being an income which accrued in the native state, it is exempt under Section 14 of the Act from tax, but it could be taken into consideration under Section 16 of the Act in computing the total income of the assessee for the purpose of determin...
R.S. Balasubramania Mudaliar Vs. Commr. of Income-tax Excess Profits T ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Mad438; [1952]22ITR370(Mad); (1952)IIMLJ739
Rajagopalan, J.The two questions that were referred to us for our decision under Section 66(1), Income-tax Act, were :(1) 'Whether there was any material for the Tribunal to hold that the business at Madu-rai did not belong to a partnership consisting of R. S. Balasubramania Mudaliar and Chidambaram, and (2) Whether there was any material for the Tribunal to hold that business at Chennima-lai, Jaffna and Batticola did not belong to a partnership consisting of R. S. Subramania Mudaliar and Krishna Mudaliar.' The assessee, Balasubramania Mudaliar, was carrying on business in cloth from the year 1936-37, in partnership with Mariappa Mudaliar. Balasubramania Mudaliar had a nine annas share and Mariappa Mudaliar, a seven annas share. The Head Office was at Chenni-malai, and there were branches at Madurai, Coimbatorc, Batticola and Jaffna, The claim of the assessee was that the partnership except for the Head Office at Chennimalai came to end at the end of 1943-44. The assessee further clai...
Muthalammal Vs. Veeraraghavalu Nayudu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-08-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Mad202; (1952)2MLJ344
1. The appellant, whose another had filed a suit in 'forma pauperis' against her husband's brother for past and future maintenance at the rate of Rs. 100 per year to be made a charge on the family properties, was on her death brought on record as the legal representative of her mother in the trial court. Both the lower courts have dismissed the suit on the ground that the appellant's mother's claim for maintenance against her husband's estate in the hands of the coparcener was a personal claim which does not survive to her legal representative on her death. The learned District Munsif relied upon a decision of Happell J. in C. R. P. No. 675 of 1945 in which the facts were as follows:2. A certain lady filed a suit against her husband for maintenance and while the suit was pending she died. But before her death she purported to assign her rights to past maintenance to her father, and on her death, the father filed an application to be brought on record as the legal representative of the ...
Seeni Naicker and ors. Vs. the State and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-08-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Mad999; (1952)2MLJ307
ORDERSomasundaram, J.1. This criminal accused against whom a charge-sheet has been laid for offences under Sections 147, 148 and 323, Penal Code and under Section 24, Cattle Trespass Act. The petitioners belong to the village of Devarkulam and they are ryots claiming some customary and prescriptive rights with regard to pasture of the cattle in the communal pasture land in the village. On 23-11-1950 when their cattle were grazing in the pasture land, they were seized by the men of the landlord and in their attempt to rescue these cattle the petitioners are said to have committed the above offences. The police have filed a charge sheet against the petitioners for the said offences.2. These proceedings are sought to be stayed under Section 5 of the Madras Act 27 of 1948. This Act was passed for the purpose of preventing the indiscriminate destruction of private forest and interference with the customary and prescriptive rights therein and for certain other purposes. The definition of 'fo...
In Re: P. Ramamoorthi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-07-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Mad94; (1952)2MLJ671
Rajamannar, C.J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the records and quash the order of his Excellency the Governor of Madras made in G. O. Ms. No. 1005 Public (Elections) dated 31st March 1952. The said order runs as follows:'In pursuance of Clauses 3 (e) & (5) of Article 171 of the Constitution of India, I, Sri Prakasa3 Governor of Madras, hereby nominate the following persons to be members of the Madras Legislative Council:1. Sri Chakravarthi Rajagopalachari2. Janab Mahammad Usman3. Sri Vellapuram Bashyam Ayyangar4. Sri Omandur P. Ramaswami Reddiar.' The petitioner is a citizen of India and one of the members of the Madras Legislative Assembly elected on the Communist's Party ticket in the recent general elections held in January 1952. In this application he attacks in particular the nomination of the second respondent, namely, Sri C. Rajagopalachari on several grounds. In view of our decision that the appl...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »