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.
State of Madras, Represented by the Deputy Commr. of Commercial Taxes ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-12-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad984
Satyanarayana Rao, J. 1. The question raised in this revision petition turns upon the interpretation of Rule 16 (2) and Rule 4 of the Madras General Sales-tax Turnover and Assessment Rules, 1939. The assessment with which we are now concerned relates to the assessment year 1949-50. The turnover in dispute is Rs. 24,239-7-0, which represents the purchase value of hides and skins, which the appellants exported to Marseilles, outside the Indian Union, after 26th January 1950. The purchases were, however, made before that date. The Tribunal upheld the claim of the assessee on the ground, that the amount is exempt from tax under Article 286(1) of the Constitution. The correctness of this is canvassed by the learned Government Pleader in this revision petition.2. In the case of hides and skins, which are not tanned Section 5 (vi) of the General Sales-tax Act provides: 'Subject to such restrictions and conditions as may be prescribed, including conditions as to licences and licence fees.........
Thambusami Reddiar Alias Sevarimuthu Reddiar Vs. Chidambaram Pillai an ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-10-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad960; (1954)IIMLJ322
Basheer Ahmad Sayeed, J.1. This petition is against the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, who restricted the scope of the decree to be passed against the first defendant to the extent of only Rs. 260, as against the claim of the petitioner in the sum of Rs. 429-8-0, which was the amount due on a promissory note. In the first instance, the learned District Munsif held that the promissory note was not supported by consideration and, therefore, he dismissed the suit as against the first defendant, & gave a decree against the second defendant only, the assignor of the promissory note in favour of the plaintiff.On appeal by the plaintiff, the learned subordinate Judge found that the promissory note was supported by consideration; but while giving a decree against the first defendant, he found that only Rs. 260 had been paid by the plaintiff and that the plaintiff would be entitled to recover only that amount under the suit promissory note. He believed the evidence of D. Ws. 3 and 4 in...
Chittoory Venkataraju Vs. themmana Sathiraju and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-09-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad946
Mack, J.1. Appellant is a decree-holder, who in execution of a decree for about Rs. 1700, sought to attach an allowance of Rs. 60 a month payable to the judgment-debtor under a will by his father by which he gifted five houses to a choultry with this direction to the trustees. The Subordinate Judge held that the decree-holder was not entitled to attach in execution a right to future maintenance and dismissed the petition with costs.2. A number of decisions have been considered by the Subordinate Judge, which do not appear to have applied and interpreted Section 60(1)(n). Civil P. C. in the same way. The leading decision on this point which has been sought to beapplied in cases of this kind is -- 'Rajindra Narain Singh v. Mt. Sundar Bibi', AIR. 1925 PC 116 (A), in which the Privy Council considered an application by a decree-holder for attachment and sale of 16 villages in execution, which the judgment-debtor obtained under the terms of a compromise deed in lieu of his maintenance witho...
A.R. Balakrishnan Vs. Commr. of Income-tax, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-09-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad1118; [1954]26ITR367(Mad)
Satyanarayana Rao, J.1. The petitioner, A. R. Balkrishnan, is the son of one A. H. s. Ramaswami, who was a shareholder and also the Managing Director of a private limited company, styled the Balakrishna Mills Ltd., East Gate, Madurai. As per the Articles of Association of the company, and the resolution of the directors dated 29-6-1946 and which was approved by the General Body at its meeting on 14-4-1947, Ramaswami was entitled to a monthly salary of Rs. 1500 besides a commission calculated at 10 per cent of the net profits. For the assessment years 1949-1950 and 1950-51, with which we are now concerned, the company was assessed to income-tax and in respect of those years, the company claimed that they were entitled to deduct the salary and commission paid to Ramaswami as per the resolution of the company referred to above.The Income-tax Officer disallowed the claim for the commission on the ground that it was a distribution to the Managing Director of the profits of the company, that...
R. Venkatasubba Reddiar Vs. the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mad ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-08-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad955
ORDERRajagopala Ayyangar, J.1. The petitioner is one of the directors of the Madras Co-operative Central Land Mortgage Bank, Ltd., and he files this-petition to obtain the quashing of a by-law effected by a resolution passed on 5-9-1953, by the general body of this co-operative bank and registered by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies on the same date,2. It is necessary to set out in some detail the rules of this bank which is registered under the Madras Co-operative Societies Act, 1932, and to the proceedings that 'were' taken for its bifurcation consequent on the separation of the Andhra state from the Madras in order to understand the proceedings that have led to the filing of this writ petition.3. As stated above the Madras Co-operative Central Land Mortgage Bank is a society registered under the provisions of the Madras Co-operative Societies Act. The management of this Bank was originally vested in a board of directors consisting of eighteen members of whom the Registrar of ...
Minor Ramchandra Velayutha thevar and ors. Vs. Seeniathal Alias Pirama ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-05-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad1011; (1954)IIMLJ511
Chandra Reddy, J.1. This appeal arises out of O. 8. No. 9 of 1947 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Tirunelveii. The plaintiff, the second wife of one Ramachandra Velayudha who died on 24-5-1946, sued for partition and for separate possession of a half share of non-agricultural properties claim-Ing it under the Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act. The first defendant is the grandson of Ramachandra Velayudha by his predeceased son. Defendants 2 and 3 are the sisters of defendant 1, defendant 4 being their mother. The suit was resisted on various grounds. Negativing the defences, a preliminary decree was passed on 5-3-1948 giving the plaintiff a half share in items 1 to 4 of schedule I and items 1 to 1 and 19 to 26 in Schedule II.2. Three questions were reserved for determination at the time of the final decree, viz.,1. Whether item 1 of Schedule I (which is a house) was capable of division?2. Whether provision should be made for the marriage expenses of defendants 2 ...
Y. Narayana Chetty and ors. Vs. the Income-tax Officer, Nellore, MaIn ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-05-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad1085; [1954]26ITR310(Mad)
Rajagopalan J. 1. These are applications under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of writs of prohibition or other appropriate writs to restrain the Income-tax Officer from enforcing the orders of assessment passed under Section 34 of the Income-tax Act, with reference to the assessment years 1943-44 and 1944-45.2. The facts that led up to the Institution of these applications cannot be in dispute. B. Audayya and C. Pitchsyya carried on trade in textiles. There were three firms. The first firmwas known as Audayya and Pitchayya. There was a registered deed of partnership dated 20-4-1936, and the partners purported to dissolve the partnership on 31-3-1948. The second firm was known as C. Pitchayya and Co., and purported to consist of C. Pitchayya and one R. Subba Rao. The deed of partnership between the two was dated 30-7-1941, and the partnership was dissolved on 31-3-1949. The third firm was known as Pra-bhat Textiles. That partnership purported to include seven persons incl...
In Re: Abbu Alias Katti Alias Muniswami
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-04-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad948
Govinda Menon, J. 1. On the confession of Ex. P-6 to the Sub-Magistrate, P. W. 10 and on the direct testimony of P. Ws. 1 to 5, there can be no doubt whatever that the appellant before us inflicted the injuries on the head of his father by means of the stones, M. Os. 1 and 2, the result of which was the cracking of the skull & the instantaneous death of the victim. Though before the Sessions Judge, the appellant stated that the confession was made because the police tutored him, we see no reason to hold that the retracting of the confession was for any true, valid or substantial reasons. Such I being the case, we are prepared to act on the confession. 2. Even if there had been no confession, there is the evidence of the five witnesses, P. Ws. 1 to 5 all of whom testify to the fact that upon the prostrate man the appellant threw the two stoneg which caused the fracture of the skull. The circumstances under which the stones were thrown, as deposed to by the witnesses, are somewhat slight...
Committee of Management of Institution Known as Bodendraswami Mutt by ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-04-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad1027
Mack, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the committee of management of an institution known as the Bodendraswami Mutt, Govindapuram, by its managing member N. Ganesa Aiyar, a mirasdar in the Kunbakonam taluk, against an order of the District Judge under Section 84(1) of the Hindu Religious Endowments Act, declaring this institution to be a temple.In the first instance, the Hindu Religious Endowments Board claimed the institution to be a mutt and a right to levy contribution on this basis. On objection taken by the committee of management, the Board came to the conclusion that the institution was not a mutt but a temple. There can be no doubt that the institution had its origin in the tomb or Samadhi of one Bondendraswami, a holy man and a saint. To commemorate his memory, as is not unusual, a matam was constructed round the samadhi in which poojas and religious observances were being done. The main ground on which it was held to be not a mutt but a temple was that there were several b...
A.G. Pandu Rao and anr. Vs. Collector of Madras and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-04-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Mad1049; [1954]26ITR99(Mad)
Satyanarayana Rao, J.1. These two applications are by two partners of a firm Known as P. Nagojee Rao & Son. The petitioners pray that this Court should issue a writ of certiorari calling for the papers and quashing, the order of attachment made by the respondent 1, the collector of Madras, at the instance of respondent 2, and to prohibit him from recovering the demand amount of Rs. 88,799-6-0, which was the tax levied on the firm under the Excess Profits Tax Act for the chargeable accounting periods commencing from 1-4-1944 and ending with 31-3-1948. W. P. No. 594 of 1953 was filed by Pandu Rao and W. P. No. 668 of 1953 by Thyagaraja Rao. The other partner of the firm besides these two partners was Gatinu Rao. The share of Gannu Rao was 3/5 and Thyagaraja Rao and Pandu Rao were each entitled to 1/5 share. The partnership, which was commenced on 1-4-1941, carried on its business without any dispute between the partners, as alleged in the affidavit filed in support of the applications, t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›