Chennai Court December 1954 Judgments
Province (State) of Madras, Represented by the Chief Secy., Govt. of M ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-17-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad519
1. This is an appeal by the defendant, the State of Madras, against the judgment of Mack J., in C. S. No. 156 of 1947 filed by the respondents against them, and the complaint of the appellant is direct- ed against the disallowance of a portion of the counter claim which had been raised by them in the suit. The plaintiffs have filed a memorandum of cross-objections objecting to the decree in respect of a portion of the counter claim in favour of the State.2. The plaintiffs are a registered firm carrying on business 'inter alia' as country craft-carriers for a long time and they were employed in such capacity by the Government of Madras for transporting rice from the west coast to Tuticorin during the years 1945-46. The terms and conditions upon which the plaintiffs were to render this service were reduced to writing and embodied in a contract dated 24-11-1945 between the Governor of Madras represented by the Commissioner of Civil Supplies on the one part and the plaintiffs on the other....
Tag this Judgment!The Union of India Vs. M. Kanakrathnam and Brothers.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-17-1954
Reported in: [1955]27ITR496(Mad)
KRISHNASWAMI NAYUDU, J. - This revision petition raises a question of the applicability of section 54 of the Indian Income-tax Act. The petitioner is the Union of India represented by the Income-tax Officer, Nagapattinam, who instituted the suit, O. S. No. 82 of 1951, on behalf of the general body of creditors of defendants Nos. 1 and 2 for a declaration that the sale deed dated 9th May, 1947, executed by defendants Nos. 1 and 2 in favour of defendant No. 3, the father-in-law of defendant No. 1, of the suit properties is null and void and not binding on the plaintiff as being sham or in fraud of creditors and made with an intention to defeat or delay the creditors of defendants Nos. 1 and 2. Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 were brothers and were carrying on business in partnership. For the financial year 1942-43, defendants Nos. 1 and 2 as partners were assessed to income-tax, etc., in the sum of Rs. 36,833-5-0. The assessment was completed by March, 1947, and a notice of demand was served on ...
Tag this Judgment!E.R. Chidambaram Chettiar Vs. Rajambal Ammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-16-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad300
1. This revision is against the order of the learned Subordinate Judge of Cuddalore alloweing the application of defendant 4 made under O. 1, R. 10(2), C. P. C. for striking her out as party improperly and unnecessarily joined in the suit. The suit was for partition, defendant 4 who is the respondent to this petition being the wife of defendant 1, defendant 1 being brother of the plaintiff.Defendant 1 was the managing member of the family. The family had extensive properties and was also doing money-lending business as could be seen from the plaint. The plaintiff impleaded defendant 4 as a party as the person in possession of cash , jewels and certain promissory notes standing in her name, all of which the plaintiff claimed as belonging to the joint family, and as such, liable to be partitioned between himself and defendant 1.The case of the plaintiff in respect of the promissory notes is that they were all obtained benami by defendant 1 in the name of his wife, that the funds of the j...
Tag this Judgment!Rm. Pm. Ranganathan Chettiar Vs. Chinna Lakshmi Achi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-16-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad546
1. The question which arises here is whether a Court has power to compel a party to be examined by a doctor against her consent. Learned counsel for the petitioner admitted that there was no statutory provision on the matter. Apart from cases of lunacy - which stand on a special or peculiar footing, there is no decision placed before me in support of the position. Counsel invokes Section 151, Civil P. C., as enabling the Court to allow such an order. I do not at all agree that Section 151, Civil P. C. has any application to a case oE this sort. To pass such an order is in my opinion tantamount to treating a human being as a material object, which no Court should do under its inherent power. The Court might draw any adverse inference against a party who refuses to examine himself or herself. But I am unable to conceive of this Court having power to compel a medical test on a human being without his or her consent - apart from any statute which clothes the Court with such power. The peti...
Tag this Judgment!Western Rly., Bombay and ors. Vs. Railway Rates Tribunal, Madras and o ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-16-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad513; (1956)IMLJ417
1. These two writ petitions are directed against the legality of the decision of the Railway Hates Tribunal, Madras, in complaint No. 7 of 1952. The railway administrations against whom the complaint was filed, have filed W. P. No. 81 of 1954, while the other is by the complainants before the Tribunal. Both the petitions raise for consideration the proper construction of Section 41, Indian Railways Act and the jurisdiction of the Tribunal under that provision.2. The complainants before the Railway Rates Tribunal were the Indian Paper Mills Association, Calcutta, which represented the Arvind Boards and Paper Products Ltd, Billimora, Surat, Bombay, Meerut Strawboard Mills - in Uttar Pradesh and Straw Products Ltd., Bhopal, while the respondents were three railway administrations, namely, the Western Railway, Bombay, the Central Railway, Bombay and the Northern Railway, New Delhi. The complaint covered a wide field but the only material points which now remain for consideration are two (1...
Tag this Judgment!Rajagopala Ayyangar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-15-1954
Reported in: (1956)1MLJ210
ORDERSomasundram, J.1. This is a revision by the accused against the order of the Second Class Magistrate, Mannargudi, in C.C. No. 1080 of 1953 converting the Calendar Case into a Preliminary Register Case under Section 347(1), Criminal Procedure Cod. The petitioner was charged for abetment of criminal breach of trust, an offence punishable under Section 408, read with Section 109, Indian Penal Code. It is in respect of the disposal of certain bags of paddy said to be worth about Rs. 6000. The police charge-sheeted the accused for the said offence.2. While the Assistant Public Prosecutor was conducting the prosecution, P.W. 2, whose paddy is said to be the subject of this offence, filed a petition on 13th September, 1954, stating therein -The offence is of a grave character and has been still more aggravated by the Ist accused's statement on the 27th instant in this Court that the paddy was his own and not the petitioner's (complainant's).It is further stated that, in view of the fact ...
Tag this Judgment!State of Madras Vs. K.H. Chambers Ltd. and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-10-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad314
Rajamannar, C.J.1. The only question before this Full Bench is whether the decision in the -- 'State of Madras v. Rallis (India) Ltd., Madras', : AIR1954Mad984 (A), requires reconsideration. The learned Judges who decided that case, Satyanarayana Rao and Rajagopalan JJ., at the request of the learned Advocate General who wished to canvass the correctness of that decision, directed the papers to be posted before another Bench. It came on thereafter before me and Umamaheswaram J., and we thought it desirable that the matter should be heard before a Full Bench. 2. The question relates to the levy of sales tax under the Madras General Sales tax Act in respect of transactions in untanned hides and skins. The provisions relating to untanned hides and skins in the Act and in the rules made under the Act may be first set ' out. Section 3 provides that every dealer shall pay for each year a tax on his total turnover for such year, and the tax shall be calculated at the rate of three pies for. e...
Tag this Judgment!N.V. Vaidyanatha Ayyar and anr. Vs. Indian Bank Ltd., Tiruchirapalli a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-10-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad486
1. The properly which forms the subject-matter of these proceedings is a building on Macdpnald's Road, Tiruchirapalli, Cantonment. A limited liability company, called the Trichinopoly Automobiles Ltd., owned that building and was doing its business there. The Vasudeva Funds Ltd., a banking con cern in Tiruchirapalli, lent Rs. 50,000, to the Automobiles Ltd. The date when the loan was made was not mentioned to us; but it. must have been sometime prior to April 1948. In that month, the Indian Rank Ltd., lent a sum of Rs. 1,00,000 to the Automobiles Ltd., on the mortgage of this and other properties.The Indian Rank sued on the mortgage in its favour, and, on 12-12-1950, obtained a decree for Rs. 1,05,000, and odd. On 28-9-1951, the Vasudevai Funds obtained a decree for Rs. 49,000 and odd. Sometime before 2-12-1953 - here too the dale was not mentioned to us - the Indian Bank Ltd., filed an execution petition for the sale of the hypo-theca. While the execution petition was pending, the Vas...
Tag this Judgment!Home Insurance Co. Ltd., New York by Its Agents, Volkart Bros., Madras ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-10-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad602
Basheer Ahmed Sayeed, J.1. These are two appeals preferred by defendants 1 and 2 against the judgment and decree of the learned Second Additional City Civil Judge in O. S. No. 656 of 1950. The Home. '' Insurance Go. Ltd. represented by its agents, Messrs. Volkart Brothers, happen to be the appellant in C. C. C. A. No, 88 of 1952 and the Indian Steamship Co. Ltd., Calcutta happen to be the appellant in C. C. C. A. No. 89 of 1952.2. The plaintiff company, who is the respondent brought a suit against the two appellants for directing them or either of them to pay a sum of Rs. 2000/- being the value of the goods with interest at six per cent, per annum and for costs. The plaintiff is a registered firm, currying on business at Madras. Defendant 1 in the suit is the Steamship company and defendant 2 is the Insurance company, having their agents at. Madras.In May 1949 the plaintiff had purchased from Messrs. N. Jivanlal and Co, Ltd., Bombay, four drums of English sodium sulphide weighing 20 cw...
Tag this Judgment!Chinnaswami Reddiar Vs. K. Kuppuswamy, S.i. of Police, Kattuputhur
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad534; 1955CriLJ1264
ORDERRamaswami, J.1. This is a revision petition against the order of discharge made by the learned Stationary Sub-Magistrate, Musiri, in P. R. No. 4 of 1954.2. The order of the learned Stationary Sub-Magistrate runs as follows:'This is a private complaint of murder filed by Chinnasami Reddiar of Mudalipatti on 21-4-1934 against Sri Kuppuswami, Sub-Inspector of Police, Kattuputhur, as a result of an occurrence that took place on 26-3-1954 at about 3 P. M. The complaint was taken on file on 21-4-1954 as P. 11. No. 4 of 1954 for an offence under S. 302, I. P. C. and summons was issued to the accused and the accused made his first appearance on 1-5-1954. The case was subsequently adjourned to 6-5-1954 on which date the accused tiled an objection petition.The accused police officer, Sri K. Kuppusami, Sub-Inspector of Police, Kattuputhur, had raised a preliminary objection that under S. 132, Criminal P. C., a prosecution against him without the sanction of the Local Government is barred as ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »