Chennai Court March 1954 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.
Chenchu Gangi Reddi and ors. Vs. State of Andhra
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad303
ORDERChandra Reddy, J.1. The petitioners, eight in number, have been convicted for various offences by the Stationary Sub-Magistrate, Pulivendla; arid sentenced to pay varing amounts of fines. All the accused have been convicted under Section 147, I.P.C. aCT cussed 1 is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 50 and the others to a fine of Rs. 30. In addition, accused 1 and 8 were convicted under Section 427 and sentence ed to pay a fine of Rs. 100 and Rs. 50 respectively. Accused 6 and 7 were also convicted under Section 342 and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 20 each under that section. Accused I was besides sentenced to imprisonment till the rising of the Court under Section 457, I. P. C. On appeal, these convictions and sentences were confirmed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Cuddappah.2. The prosecution case is that in pursuance of a common object of causing damage to an oil engine belonging to. P. W. 1, they trespassed into the shed wherein the engine was installed, and with the aid of...
In Re: P. Kondiah and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad947
ORDERChandra Reddy, J. 1. This revision petition is against the judgment of the Sessions Judge of Masulipatara confirming the conviction of the first accused under Section 494, I. P. C. and the sentence of four months' rigorous imprisonment and the conviction of the 2nd accused under Section 4 (3) of the Madras Hindu (Bigamy Prevention and Divorce) Act and the sentence of Rs. 60 in default, imprisonment. 2. The case against the first petitioner is that he took a third wife while his marriage with the second wife subsisted. Several pleas were taken by the accused, but all of them were rejected and the petitioners were found guilty by the Additional First Class Magistrate, Bandar, which was confirmed by the Sessions Judge of Masulipatam. 3. In revision, the propriety of the convictions is questioned by Miss Sarala on the ground that the complaint is filed by one who is not a person aggrieved within the meaning of Section 198, Criminal P. C. Prom the provisions of Section 198, it is clear...
Kuppuswami Goundar Vs. K. Muthuswami Goundan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad208; (1954)IIMLJ514
Mack, J.1. This, appeal raises an interesting, point of equity arising in execution.Appellant is the fifth judgment-debtor in a mortgage decree in O. S. No. 172 of 1935 involving .10 items of hypotheca comprising a total extent of about 32 acres. The date of the mortgage was 15-7-1922. The preliminary decree was passed on 19-8-1936 and the final decree in 1937. The appellant is only concerned with S. No. 430. six acres 20 cents of dry land, which was purchased by bis grand-father on 4-12-1926 by a sale-deed, Ex. II, from the original mortgagor. He appeals against the dismissal of E. A. No. 37 of 1951, which he filed in execution for a direction that this item of property be sold last in E. P. No. 579 of 1949 in the following circumstances.2. On 24-11-1926 the mortgagor sold four items to the seventh respondent and on 17-6-1935 some other items to the eighth respondent. All these alienees were impleaded in the mortgage suit, O. S. No. 172 of 1935. The decree was later assigned to Athapp...
Thippareddigari Chinnakonda Reddi Vs. Seshi Reddi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad889; (1954)IIMLJ228a
ORDER1. This is a reference by the District Magistrate under the following circumstances:2. A complaint was filed against the respondent and five others under Sections 5 and 6 of the Child Marriage Restraint Act (19 of 1929) in the Court of the Sub Divisional Magistrate of Kurnool.After recording the sworn statement of the complainant and without holding an enquiry or investigation into the matter, the Bub Divisional Magistrate ordered notice of the petition to the accused under Section 8 of the Act.Before he could proceed further into the matter the casa was transferred to the Additional First Class Magistrate's Court, Nandyal. At that stage, the accused filed a petition before the Additional First, Class Magistrate under Section 10 of the Act to dismiss the complaint as the mandatory provisions of that section were not observed by the Court that issued the process. The Additional First Class Magistrate, Nandyal, gave notice of that petition to the complainant and his pleader and as t...
Chitrapur Subbayyamma Vs. Chitrapur Buchi Venkayya and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad876
Mack, J.1. These are three petitions for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against our judgment and decree in A. S. Nos. 31 & 491 of 1949. The suit under appeal was one for partition in which the six sons of the late Chitrapur Venkatachelam Pantullu, who was public prosecutor and Government Pleader of East Godavari district for many years, were each given by the Subordinate Judge 1/6 share in plaint items 1 to 40. The suit was filed by four younger sons and was resisted by the eldest son, the first defendant, who claimed the properties as his self-acquisitions. In appeals from this decree, we confirmed the partition decree as regards items 1 to 25 and allowed the appeal of the first defendant and his wife the 3rd defendant as regards items 26 to 40 which, we held, were their self-acquisitions, or separate property.2. In C. M. P. No. 12347 of 1953, the plaintiffs geek leave to appeal as regards items 26 to 40. The value of these items is admittedly more than Rs. 20,000. As it is a re...
In Re: Sanga Rosi Reddy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad1042
ORDERChandra Reddy, J. 1. The District Magistrate has made this reference recommending the reduction of the fine to Rs. 200 or to restore the sentence passed by the trial Court.2. The facts leading up to the reference are the following. The accused was convicted under Section 4 (1) (b) of the Madras Prohibition Act and sentenced to four months' rigorous imprisonment. He preferred an appeal against the conviction and sentence to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. Onthe request of the accused, the lower appellate Court seems to have modified the sentence into one of fine of Rs. 400, which was paid by the accused immediately without any demur.The District Magistrate has made this reference for the purpose mentioned above on the ground that the appellate Court has no Jurisdiction to levy a fine higher than Rs. 200, which is the maximum fine that could be imposed by the trial Court. It is true that the powers of an appellate Court are in this wise not higher than those of the trial Court. But t...
State of Madras Represented by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial T ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad1029; (1954)IIMLJ230
ORDER1. This is a revision petition by the Government against the order of the Sales-tax Tribunal. The turnover in dispute is Rs. 1,99,179-3-4, which represents the price of coffee seeds, which the assessee exported outside the Indian territory during the assessment year. The contract for the sale with the foreign buyers was on 26-10-1949, and the Coffee seeds were booked on 25-1-1950 at Mangalore. The ship actually left the port on 28-1-1950. The foreign purchasers opened a letter of credit which was confirmed by the branch of the Imperial Bank at Mangalore. On 1-2-1950, two drafts were drawn, and on 2-2-1950, they were discounted by the assessee at the Imperial Bank branch at Mangalore. This bill of lading, it is common ground, was taken, as is usual in such cases to the order of the seller; but the insurance was paid by the buyer. The agreement to sell, therefore, was before the Constitution, and the goods were actually put on board at Mangalore on 25-1-1950. Viewed from whatever po...
The State of Madras Vs. Govindlal and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-1954
Reported in: [1956]7STC409(Mad)
Somasundaram, J.1. These two appeals are preferred by the State against the judgment and decree of the Principal Judge of the City Civil Court in O. S. No. 1377 of 1949 and O. S. No. 287 of 1950. C.C.C.A. No. 7 of 1952 is against the decision in O.S. No. 287 of 1950, and C.C.C.A. No. 8 of 1952 is against the decision in O.S. No. 1377 of 1949. A common question of fact and law arises in both the suits and so they were tried together and a common judgment was given. In each case the plaintiff sued for recovery of the sales tax which was levied from him by the Government and which he paid under protest. The main question in both the cases is whether in respect of the two transactions, the sales took place within the State of Madras or outside the State. In both cases, the goods were sent by rail consigned to self and the railway receipt was sent to the agents of the plaintiffs outside Madras on condition that it should be given to the buyer on payment of the sale price. There is one claus...
T.K. Mohamed Zackria and Co., Tanners, Vaniambadi Vs. Govt. of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-19-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad239
Satyanarayana Rao, J.1. The assessees are licensed tanners and they were taxed on a purchase turnover of Rupees 9,83,438-13-8 under Rule 16 of the Madras General Sales-tax (Turnover and Assessment) Rules. The contention before the Appellate Tribunal was that after tanning the skins, such tanned skins were exported outside the Indian Union and, therefore, they were entitled to exemption under Article 286 of the Constitution. This contention was rightly rejected by the Appellate Tribunal, and it is not now persisted in. But the short point, that has been raised by the learned counsel for the assessees, is that under Rule 16 a tanner may be taxed on the purchase price only if his purchase was from a licensed dealer of untanned hides and skins, and if his purchase was only for the purpose of tanning by him. Until these two conditions were satisfied, the levy of the tax by the department could not be justified.As regards the second of the two conditions, it is stated that the language of th...
South India Co-operative Insurance Society Ltd., Madras Vs. Corporatio ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-19-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad873; [1954]24CompCas323(Mad)
1. This is a reference by the Chief Judge of the Court of Small Causes, Madras, under Rule 17, Schedule IV (Taxation Rules) of the Madras City Municipal Act. The only question in this case is whether the South India Co-operative Insurance Society Ltd., Madras, is liable to pay the tax on companies to the Corporation of Madras. The learned Chief Judge has held that it is not and has set aside the assessment made on it. Under Section 110, Madras City Municipal Act, every company which transacts business within the City in any half year for not less than sixty days in the aggregate shall pay a half yearly tax assessed in accordance with the rules in Schedule IV, but in no case exceeding rupees one thousand. "Company" is defined in Section 3(9-A) thus: " 'Company' means a company as defined in the Indian Companies Act, 1913, or formed in pur-suance of an Act of Parliament or of Royal Charter or Letters Patent, or of an Act of the Legislature of a British Possession, or of a law of an India...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »