Chennai Court December 1956 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.
C. Dhanalakshmi Ammal Vs. Income-tax Officer, Madras.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-18-1956
Reported in: [1957]31ITR460(Mad)
The Judgement of the Court delivered byRAJAMANNAR, C.J. - This is a petition under article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus to the Income-tax Officer, Second Additional City Circle, Madras, the Collector of Nilgiris, Nilgiris District, and the Tahsildar of Coonoor, Coonoor Taluk, Nilgiris District, restraining them from proceeding to attach, or to bring to sale, the petitioners properties for the realisation of the alleged income-tax arrears of her husband, Taranisingh Gramani, and in particular from proceeding with the sale of the Benhutty Estate, Kulikal Village, Coonoor Taluk, Nilgiris District.For the recovery of arrears of income-tax due from the petitioners husband, Tharansingh Gramani, a certificate was issued by the Income-tax Officer, the first respondent, to the Collector of Nilgiris (the second respondent) under section 46 (2) of the Indian Income-tax Act. The Collector, in pursuance of this certificate, proceeded under...
Kamakshi Ammal and anr. Vs. Arukkani Ammal and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-17-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Mad440
Rajamannar, C, J.1. In our opinion the application of Article 180, Limitation Act, to the facts of this case by the learned Judge was right. Though the third column of Article 180 refers to the date when the sale becomes absolute, that clause must be read not only with the provisions of Order 21, Rule 92 (1), C.. P, Code, but also with the other material sections and Orders of the Code. This view has been authoritatively enunciated by their lordships of the Judicial Committee in Chandramani Shaha v. Ansrjan Bibi .In the present case there was an application under Order 21, Rule 58, Civil P. C., by Nagammal, who claimed under a possessory mortgage, and that claim was, as a matter of fact, allowed on 14-6-1943. The decree-holder filed a suit to set aside this claim order as she was entitled to do. This suit terminated in a compromise decree only on 15-8-1944 and the application under Order 21, Rule 95, Civil P. C. was made by the decree-holder on 14-8-1947. within three years from the da...
Sriranga Nacharammal Vs. Varalakshmi Fund (Vellore) Ltd., by Its Manag ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-17-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Mad640
ORDERBasheer Ahmed Sayeed, J.1. This civil revision petition is against the oArder of the learned Subordinate Judge of Vellore directing the petitioner to furnish security in the sum of Rs. 500 towards the cost of the suit. The petitioner sought leave to file the suit in forma pauperis and she was permitted to file the suit in forma pauperis and the suit was numbered. The suit' was one for maintenance and enforcement of a charge against the properties of her deceased husband. The husband is said to have executed in the year 1929 a deed under which he under took to pay a sum of Rs. 30 per month towards the maintenance for the first wife with whom he could not live amicably, and also a sum of Rs. 50 every year for her clothing. The petitioner is the first wife of the husband, and the husband married a second wife. On the occasion of the second marriage, this settlement appears to have taken place.2. The case of the petitioner is that under this agreement which is a registered one, she wa...
Sri Raja Rajeswari Ambal of Sri Dattatreya Mandiram Through Its Agent ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-13-1956
Reported in: (1957)2MLJ73
Rajagopala Ayyangar, J.1. These two appeals against the order of the Estates Abolition Tribunal, Madurai, raise a common question for consideration.2. Two villages Sivandanur and Vallam, which were originally owned or formed part of the Zamin Estate of Chookampatti were notified and taken over by the Government under the Estates Abolition Act. The advance compensations amounting to Rs. 10, 980 and Rs. 7,605 have been deposited for these two villages respectively before the Abolition Tribunal. The District Board of Tirunelveli, as the manager of a Choultry at Courtallam, laid claim to these compensation amounts as a creditor and their right was disputed by the respresentatives-in-title of the purchasers of these two villages, the purchases having taken place as far back as 1868. The Tribunal has upheld the claim of the District Board to rank as a creditor as regards the compensation amounts and has apportioned the amount in deposit between the claimant and the objector. It is the correc...
Mysore Sugar Company Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-12-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Mad558
1. The questions referred to this Court for its decision under Section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act are: 1. Whether the sum of Rs. 34930 being the proportionate profits on sale of sugar by the South India Corporation Ltd. is assessable to tax under the provisions of the Indian Income-tax Act? 2. Whether the profits of Rs. 1786 on the sale of molasses in Bombay were rightly included in the assessment? 2. The Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd., Bangalore is the assessee. It is a public limited company incorporated in the Mysore State and carries on business as manufacturer and seller of sugar. Its factory is situated in Mandya in the Mysore State. The questions now referred to us have arisen in regard to the assessment of this company for the year 1943-44. The assessee entered into an agreement with the South India Corporation Ltd., Pudukottah, on 1-7-1942, and the first of the questions referred to us turns upon the legal relationship established by this agreement which has been annexed to the state...
M.K. Ranganathan and anr. Vs. A.S. Jaffers and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-11-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Mad382
1. The former employees of the Madras Electric Tramways Ltd., in liquidation, claiming to represent themselves and all the other former workmen of the company numbering some 1611 persons, sought leave to file a suit in 'forma pauperis to obtain various reliefs against the receivers appointed by the trustees of the mortgagee debenture holders of the company.2. Now, it has been held in this court that a representative suit cannot be filed in forma pau-peris unless all the persons sought to be represented are without the means to pay the prescribed court-fee. I take it that It must have been difficult to prove that every one of the 1613 persons, for whose benefit the suit is sought to be filed, is so circumstanced. So the secretary of the Madras Electric Tramway Workers' Association appears to have invoked the assistance of the State Government and on 23-3-1956 the Government issued the following notification:"In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 73 of the Madras Court-fees and ...
S.T. Sahib Vs. N. Hasan Ghani Sahib and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-10-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Mad646
Ramaswami, J. 1. These are connected appeals directed against the decrees and judgments of the learned Subordinate Judge of Tirunelveli in O. S. Nos. 113 of 1950 and 25 of 1951.2. The facts are: The first defendant in both these suits S.T. Sahib is a substantial landlord of Vadakarai village who was formerly trading in Ceylon and apparently after making his fortune there has come and settled in Tirunelveli District. He had taken on lease Mekkari, Pathavtdtkarai thurai Mutt and Kumarar Kovil lands. This S.T. Sahib was employing as his agent Muhammad Hussain Rowther for collecting the rents, sub-leasing etc., in respect of these lands. The Mekkarai lands are found to have been taken on lease by this Hussain Rowther under an authorization letter from S.T. Sahib at Tiruvaduthurai at the rate of Rs. 14,500/- per year and a preliminary agreement has been entered into on S.T. Sahib's behalf by this Hussain Howtiier. The lease deed relating to the transaction came into effect from 1-7-1947.3. ...
Ponnuswami Chettiar Vs. P. Vellaimuthu Chettiar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Mad355
ORDERPanchapakesa Ayyar, J. 1. This petition raises an interesting question of law not exactly covered by any ruling. It is a petition by one Ponnuswami Chettiar, the defendant in S. C. S. No. 8588 of 1953, on the file of the Court of Small Causes, Madras, for revising and setting aside the judgment and decree in N. T. A. No. 220 of 1954, which was filed against the decree and judgment of the learned Chief Justice in that suit. The main point of law is whether the absence of the name of the payee in a promissory note will make the note invalid, though the payee was known with certainty even at execution. The facts are briefly these: It was a suit brought against the petitioner by one Vallaimuthu Chettiar for the recovery of Rs. 1177-8-0, the principal and interest due on a promissory note, Ex. P. 1 dated 16-11-1950, for Rs. 1000. Two defences were raised by the petitioner 1 the lower, courts. One was that the promissory note was not supported by consideration. The lower courts found th...
Mohamed Othuman Sahib, Melapalayam Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Mad ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Mad422
Rajagopalan, J. 1. The assessee was a 'dealer in cotton goods, sarangs and kailees, with his place of business at Melapalayam. Between August 1940 and December 1944 he purchased some plots of lands in T. S. No. 3140 in Melapalayam, which together totalled 2.54 acres. They were cultivable lands and were registered in revenue records as dry lands assessed to land revenue. The price paid by the assessee for these lands totalled Rs. 3,400. Even by April 1944, the, assessee entered into an agreement with the Muslim Educational Society, Melapalayam, to construct buildings on the land for use as a school. Construction commenced in 1944 and was completed in 1946 ata cost of Rs. 33,167. The Committee occupied the buildings even before they were completed and paid rent which was eventually raised to Rs, 100 a month. The Committee decided to buy the property, and after some negotiations the assessee sold the land with the buildings thereon to the Committee for Rs. 80,000 on 5-6-1946.2. The Depart...
T. S. M. O. Mohamed Othuman Sahib Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-1956
Reported in: [1957]31ITR480(Mad)
the judgement of the Court was delivered byRAJAGOPALAN, J. - The assessee was a dealer in cotton goods, sarangs and kailees, with his place of business at Melapalayam. Between August, 1940, and December, 1944, he purchased some plots of lands in T. S. 3140in Melapalayam which together totalled 2.54 acres. They were cultivable lands and were registered in revenue records as dry lands assessed to land revenue. The price paid by the assessee for these lands totalled Rs. 3,400. Even by April, 1944, the assessee entered into an agreement with Muslim Educational Society, Melapalayam, to construct buildings on the land for use as a school. Construction commenced in 1944 and was completed and completed in 1946 at a cost of Rs. 33,167. the committee occupied the buildings even before they were completed and paid rent which eventually raised to Rs. 100 a month. the committee decided to buy the property, and after some negotiations the assessee sold the land with the buildings thereon to the comm...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »