Chennai Court August 1954 Judgments
Payachi Etathil Krishnan Atiydti Vs. Chanderakkaran Kizhakke Veetil Ka ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-31-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad721
ORDERRamaswami Goundar, J.1. This is a revision filed by the defendant against the decree of the learned District Munsif in a small cause suit filed against him by the plaintiff respondent herein For contribution. The present plaintiff was the first defendant and the defendant was the second defendant in another suit O. S. No. 69 of 1949 brought against both of them by a third party in respect of land for a declaration of title and injunction. In that suit both defendants 1 and 2 set up title and possession' in their respective right. That ig to say, the first defendant filed a written statement contending that the property belonged to him and was in his possession in his own right and likewise the second defendant put forward the contention that the property was in his possession in his own right.The trial Judge found against the contentions put forward by both the defendants and decreed the suit in favour of plaintiff with costs payable by both the defendants. In execution that plain...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Mr. Hayles, Editor of The Mail and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-27-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad1; 1955CriLJ1
Mack J. 1. As Special Industrial Tribunal appointed by the Government of Madras, I adjudicated, while a sitting Judge of this Court, the disputes between the managements and workers of malgamation Ltd. Madras, in their eleven concerns including 'The Mail', Madras. My award, which may be marked as Ex. P. 1, was pronounced on 8-2-1954 and notified in the Port St. George Gazette on 12-2-1954. It was passed substantially on an agreement signed by Mr. Ladden, Chairman of Amalgamations Ltd., and Sri R. Venkataraman, President of the Simpson and Group Companies Workers' Union, by which they settled all their differences in controversy, but left it to me to decide all matters of punishment for misconduct and reinstatement agreeing to accept my decision as anal. I found it necessary to go into the origin and the history of these disputes in my award. In 'The Mail' of the 5th of April, in the leading editorial with the caption 'He is Right' there appeared the following extract as regards which I...
Tag this Judgment!Pl. Sp. Nk. Nagappa Chettiar Vs. Commr. of Income-tax, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-27-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad162; [1954]26ITR741(Mad)
Rajamannar, C.J. 1. This is ah application under Section 66(3), Income-tax Act. The petitioner is the karta of a Hindu undivided family and as such made his return for the assessment year 1944-45. The Income-tax Officer made an assessment by his order dated 25-3-1949. There was an appeal therefrom to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, who passed his order on 30-4-1951 reducing the assessment. An appeal was then preferred to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal which was disposed of finally on 19-1953. The notice of the order under Sub- section (4) of Section 33 was served upon the petitioner on31-1-1955. On 30-3-1953, the petitioner sent by registered post from Devakottai an application under Section 66 (1), Income-tax Act, requiring the Appellate Tribunal to state a case and refer certain questions of law to this court. On the same day the requisite fee of Rs. 100 was sent by Money order through the post office at Devakottai to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras. The applicatio...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Kailasanathaswami Vs. G. Krishna Ayyar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-27-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad555
ORDERRajagopala Ayyangar, J.1. This is an application by the plaintiff under Section 25 of the Small Cause Courts Act to revise the decree of the Additional Sub-Court of Tirunelveli dismissing the plaintiff's suit.2. The petitioner is the Executive Officer of the Kailasanathaswami temple, while the respondent here who was the defendant before the Subordinate Judge was a person who had taken on lease a vacant site belonging to the plaintiff-petitioner. The property of the plaintiff temple was leased to the defendant under a registered lease deed dated 1-3-1942 for a period of five years and the defendant undertook to surrender vacant possession of the site on 28-2-1947.He also agreed to remove the superstructures which he might put thereon. Under the terms of the lease, the landlord (plaintiff) had to pay the vacant site tax due to the Municipality, while the lessee who was intending to put up structures upon the site covenanted to pay the municipal tax due on the property which at that...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of Customs, Madras Vs. Lala Gopikissen Gokuldass
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-20-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad187
Rajagopala Ayyangar, J. 1. This is an appeal against the Judgment of Panchapakesa Aiyar J. allowing in part an application filed under Section 45 Specific Belief Act, and issuing a Writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Collector of Customs, Madras, to release 12 Diesel Engines belonging to the respondent (applicant in the application) and imported by him on the respondent's paying the entire customs duty payable on the value of the engines plus 12 1/2 per cent of the entire value of the goods and setting aside the order of confiscation which has been passed by the Customs Authorities in respect of these engines. The Collector of Customs his filed this appeal while, the respondent who filed the application for the writ of mandamus has filed a memo of cross-objection fn which he has prayed that the learned Judge should not have imposed a fine of 12 1/2 per cent on the value of the goods which the learned Judge made a condition for their clearance. 2. The facts giving rise to these...
Tag this Judgment!Public Prosecutor Vs. Annamalai Udayan and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-18-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad608
Somasundaram, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the State against the acquittal of the two accused by the learned Stationary Magistrate, Omalur in C. C. No. 525 of 1952, on his file. The two accused were tried by the learned Magistrate for an offence under S. 325, I. P. C. The police fileda charge-sheet against the two accused for the murder of one Velayudam who died as a result of injuries he received on 13-12-1951. The case was taken as a Preliminary Register case. But after evidence was let in, the learned Magistrate passed an order on 30-4-1952, holding that only a prima facie case against the two accused under S. 325, I. P. C. was made out and discharged the accusedof the offence of murder. A charge for, an offence under S. 325, I. P. C. was framed against the accused and they were tried for that offence.2. The prosecution case is this. The first accused was a forest guard. The second accused was his henchman assisting accused 1 in the collection of 'mamul' payment from villager...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: S. Govind Swaminathan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-17-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad121; 1955CriLJ505
ORDER1. This Letters Patent Appeal is against an order of Mack J.- while presiding over the Second Criminal Sessions of the High Court. The learned Judge held that the appellant had committed 'ex facie' contempt of court on 30-4-1954, and affording to the appellant an opportunity to show cause why he should not be committed for contempt found him guilty and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 1000. The appeal is against this order of Mack J. convicting the appellant and sentencing him to the punishment abovementioned.2. We are not now concerned with the detailsof the contempt alleged or the merits of theContentions raised by the appellant in this appeal, as the question which we have now to decide merely relates to a preliminary objectionthat the appeal itself is incompetent underC1ause 15 of the Letters Patent.3. In order to appreciate how the case has arisen it would be convenient to set out in brief outline the matters that led to the present proceedings. Mr. Justice Mack was appoint...
Tag this Judgment!His Holiness Sri Vishwothama Thirtha Swamiar of Sode Mutt, Udipi, Mino ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-17-1954
Reported in: (1956)1MLJ125
Govinda Menon, J.1. My learned brother has dealt with the historical aspect and mythological tradition of the institution in question and I do not propose to traverse the same over again for in my view, how the temple came into existence cannot be ascertained with any degree of exactitude from the mass of material most of which is mythological and is not founded on concrete facts which can be tested in the light of actuality. What we have to ascertain is whether the famous Sri Krishna temple at Udipi which is held in great reverence and sanctity not only by the followers of Madhvachariar throughout the whole of India but by all the pious Hindus, can be held to be a public temple as defined in Sub-section (2) of Section 2 of Act V of 1947. Exhibit B-6 is the plan of Shiyali village which shows that the temple building of Sri Krishna is on the west of Madhva Sarovar, the holy tank, and is approached by a gate from the southern side. Divided by a road from Sri Krishna temple are the templ...
Tag this Judgment!Pulappatta Kuthiravattath Kottayil Nallappada Nair Vs. Chami Mannadiar ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-13-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Mad177; (1956)IMLJ289
Rajamannar, C.J.1. This second appeal was first heard by Krishnaswami Nayudu J. who considered it necessary that it should be heard by a Bench in view of theimportant question raised in the case.2. The appellant is the plaintiff in O. 6. No. 23 of 1945 on the file of the court of the SubordinateJudge of Palghat. He is the second stani, of Kuthiravattath Swarupam. He succeeded to thestanom on 17-5-1942 on the death of one AppuThamban. Appu Thamban had succeeded Kunhunni Thamban in 1927 when the latter becamethe first stani.The suit was for recovery of possession of certain items of property attached to the second stanoin which were outstanding on a kanom demise with Anyappa Mannathil tarwad. The properties were alienated by Kunhunni Thamban by document Ex. D. 2, dated 28-1-1922, by way of possessory mortgage in favour of one Kartyayani Amma. The appellant alleged that the said alienation was not binding oh him as it was not executed for any purpose valid and binding on the stanom.There ...
Tag this Judgment!Bhavani Kudal Co-operative Urban Bank Ltd. Vs. B.R. Venkatapati Naidu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-13-1954
Reported in: (1955)ILLJ21Mad
Rajagopala Ayyangar, J.1. The Bhavani Kudal Co-operative Urban Bank which was the defendant in O.S. No. 159 of 1947 on the file of the District Munsif's Court, Erode, is the appellant in this second appeal. The plaintiff-respondent was the secretary of the defendant bank and had been dismissed from the defendant's service by an order, dated 21 May 1944. The suit out of which this appeal arises was filed for the recovery of damages for wrongful dismissal, salary during a period of suspension, the provident fund amount standing to the plaintiff's credit, and interest on these sums, etc.2. The facts giving rise to these proceedings were shortly these. The plaintiff had been secretary of the defendant bank for nearly fifteen years and as secretary was under bye-law 23 (a)(ii) responsible for the executive administration of the bank. While so a notice, dated 15 October 1943, was received from the Registrar of Co-operative Societies setting out a number of irregularities committed by the man...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »