Chennai Court April 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.
A.B. Abdul Gaffoor Sahib Vs. the Election Commissioner and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-11-1956
Reported in: (1956)2MLJ575
ORDERRajagopala Ayyangar, J.1. This petition arises out of the proceedings for the election of a Municipal Councillor for the 8th ward of the Dindigul Municipality.2. There was an election for the 8th ward of the Dindigul Municipality, the poll being on 27th October, 1955. There were only two candidates who stood viz., the petitioner and the respondent. The petitioner was declared elected as having obtained the majority of votes, he having secured 577 votes as against the 545 votes, by the respondent. The respondent thereupon filed a petition to set aside the election of the petitioner, the main ground being that the petitioner had connived at the commission of election offences falling under Chapter 9-A of the Indian Penal Code, the main charge being one of false personation. He also claimed a declaration that he had been validly elected. The returned candidate contested the charges made against him, and also pleaded recrimination making the same charges of false personation against t...
K. Panchapagesa Ayyar and anr. Vs. K. Kalyanasundaram Ayyar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-11-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Mad472
Ramaswami, J. 1. This is an appeal preferred against the decree and Judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge of Tanjore in O. S. No. 15 of 1947. 2. The facts are:-- The plaintiff and defendants 1 to 3 are brothers. Defendants 4 to 11 aretheir sons. Defendants 12 to 17 are alienees. Thisfamily of four brothers was a leading Mirasdar family of Kunniyur. They own lands in several villages.The plaintiff was residing at Kunniyur andKumbakonam. The first defendant wasmanaging the lands at Perugavazhanthan.The second defendant was managing the landsin Kunniyur, Periakudi and Tiruventhurai. Thethird defendant was managing the lands at Agaram,Palayangudi, Manakud and Vikrapandiam. Theyused to send the net realisations to Kunniyur andinvest them in banks at Kumbakonam and they visedto lend out moneys also. This family was also assessed to income-tax. These brothers were living amicably till 1940 and improving the patrimony left by their father and came to own 112 velis of land. In November 1940...
State of Madras, Represented by the Deputy Commr. of Commercial Taxes, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-11-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Mad627; [1956]7STC617(Mad)
1. This petition preferred by the Government, under Section 12-B of the Madras General sales Tax Act, arose out of proceedings taken under the Act, to assess the turnover of the respondent for the year 1950-51. The assessee did not file any return of his turnover for 1950-51 within the time prescribed. After other proceedings had been taken by the assessing authorities, he voluntarily submitted a return of his turnover on 20-2-1954.That return, supported by the entries in his account books, was accepted by the assessing authorities and on 11-3-1954 the respondent was assessed to tax on a turnover of Rs. .18,651-13-9.2. That assessment was confirmed by the Commercial Tax Officer on appeal but on further appeal by the assesses the Tribunal held that the assessment fell within the scope of Rule 17 (1) of the Madras General gales Tax Rules & that the assessment made on 11-3-1954 was barred by the period of limitation prescribed by the rule. The view of the Tribunal was that the turnover of...
Krishnamurthi (M.K.) Vs. Industrial Tribunal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-1956
Reported in: (1956)IILLJ238Mad
Rajagopalan, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of certiorari to set aside the award of the industrial tribunal, Madras, dated 7 September 1953.2. The petitioner was the sole proprietor of the business, which he carried on under the name of Photo Litho Press, Madras. On 29 February 1953, the workers through their union made certain demands of their employer, the petitioner, which he did not comply with. Conciliation proceedings were commenced under the Industrial Disputes Act on 26 March 1953. During the pendency of those proceedings, on 11 April 1953, the petitioner issued a notice in the following terms:Owing to my domestic and other circumstances. I am unable to run the press for some time. I regret to inform all the employees of the press that their services will not be required from today. They will however be paid one month's wages in lieu of notice and may receive the wages due to them up to date from the office on Tuesday, ...
M.K. Krishnamurthy, Ex-proprietor, Photo Litho Press Vs. the Industria ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-1956
Reported in: (1956)2MLJ225
ORDERRajagopalan, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of certiorari to set aside the award of the Industrial Tribunal, Madras, dated 7th September, 1953.2. The petitioner was the sole proprietor, of the business, which he carried on under the name of Photo Litho Press, Madras. On 20th February, 1953, the workers through their Union made certain demands of their employer, the petitioner, which he did not comply with. Conciliation proceedings were commenced under the Industrial Disputes Act, on 26th March, 1953. During the pendency of those proceedings, on nth April, 1953, the petitioner issued a notice in the following terms:Owing to my domestic and other circumstances, I am unable to run the Press for sometime. I regret to inform all the employees of the Press that their services will not be required from today. They will however be paid one month's wages in lieu of notice and may receive the wages due to them up to date from the Of...
K. Ganga Setty Vs. the Collector of Customs, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-06-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Mad19; (1955)2MLJ315a
1. This is an appeal from the judgment of Subba Rao J. on an application (4680 of 1952) filed by. the appellant under Section 45, Specific Relief Act, for the issue of a mandamus directing the Collector of Customs, Madras, to forbear from collecting or realising or taking any other steps whatever to recover the fines or penalties levied by the Assistant Collector of Customs by his order' dated 23-9-1952, confirmed, by the Collector of Customs on appeal, on 8-10-1952, in the following circumstances.The appellant is the proprietor of a firm called Sri Balakrishna Flour Mills. He is a dealer in fodder and as such a regular importer of fodder from foreign countries. He placed an order through one V.S.L. Nathan, Indenting Agents, for the Import of "feed oats" from Australia. The goods arrived in Madras on 1-8-1952 and when the appellant attempted to clear the goods, the customs authorities insisted on the production of a licence to enable him to clear the goods.As the appellant was unable t...
The State of Madras, Represented by the Deputy Commissioner of Commerc ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-06-1956
Reported in: (1956)2MLJ309
ORDERRajagopalan, J.1. These are petitions under Section 12-B of the Madras General Sales Tax Act to revise the order of the Appellate Tribunal.2. The respondents were dealers in motor cars and their accessories. On the turnover of the sales of these goods, they were liable to pay sales tax at the standard' rate of Rs. 0-0-3 in the rupee, prescribed by Section 3(1)(b) of the Act. In addition they were liable to pay tax at the rate of Rs. 0-0-6 in the rupee under Section 3(2)(iv) of the Act. The assessing authorities included in the taxable turnover of each of these dealers amounts collected by them by way of tax under Section 8-B. of the Act and assessed that part of their total turnover also at the rate of Rs. 0-0-9 in the rupee. In Krishnasaumi Mudaliar's case (1954) 2 M.L.J. 151 : (1954) S.T.C. 88, this Court held that the turnover made up of amounts collected by way of tax by a registered dealer could not be assessed at all to any tax under the Act. Subsequent to that the Madras Le...
K. Ganga Setty, Proprietor, Sri Balakrishna Flour Mills Vs. the Collec ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-06-1956
Reported in: (1956)2MLJ315
P.V. Rajamannar, C.J.1. This is an appeal from the Judgment of Subba Rao on an Application (No. 4680 of 1952) filed by the appellant under Section 45 of the Specific Relief Act for the issue of mandamus directing the Collector of Customs, Madras, to forbear from collecting or realising or taking any other steps whatever to recover the fines or penalties levied by the Assistant Collector of Customs by his order, dated 23rd September, 1952, confirmed by the Collector of Customs on appeal, on 8th October, 1952, in the following circumstances. The appellant is the proprietor of a firm called Sri Balakrishna Flour Mills. He is a dealer in fodder and as such a regular importer of fodder from foreign countries. He placed an order through one V.S.L. Nathan, Indenting Agents, for the import of 'Feed Oats' from Australia. The goods arrived in Madras on 1st August, 1952 and when the appellant attempted to clear the goods, the customs authorities insisted on the production of a licence to enable h...
Sankaranarayana Pillai and anr. Vs. Kandasamia Pillai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-06-1956
Reported in: AIR1956Mad670; (1956)2MLJ411
Govinda Menon, J.1. The following questions have been referred to a Full Bench by Panchapakesa Ayyar, J.Has the plaintiff who as a minor, has been made eo nomine a party to a sale-deed or other document of alienation by his mother and guardian to pay Court-fee under Section 7(iv-A) of the Court-fees Act and to pray for the cancellation of the sale-deed expressly or impliedly and pay Court-fee under Section 7 (iv-A) of the Court-fees Act or can he ignore and bypass such alienation alleging illiteracy, ignorance, lack of worldly knowledge, undue influence, coercion, etc., and pray for mere possession of the lands paying Court-fee under Section 7(v)(b) of the Court-fees Act? Will it make any difference if the mother executing the sale-deed making him eo nomine a party is a guardian appointed under the Guardians and Wards Act?Is the position of a sale-deed executed by a father of the minor as guardian of the minor son and not as manager of the joint family and head of the coparcenary, any ...
State of Madras Represented by Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-06-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Mad682; [1956]7STC537(Mad)
1. These are petitions under Section 12(B) of the Madras General Sales-tax Act to revise the orders of the Appellate Tribunal.2. The respondents were dealers in motor cars and their accessories. On the turnover of the sales of those goods, they were liable to pay sales tax at the standard rote of Re. 0-0-3 in the rupee, prescribed by Section 3d) (b) of the Act in addition they wore liable to pay tax at the rate of Re. 0-0-6 in the rupee under Section 3(2) (iv) of the Act. The assessing authorities included in the taxable turnover of each of these dealers amounts collected by them by way of tax under Section 8-B of the Act and assessed that part of their total turnover also at the rate of Re. 0-0-9 in the rupee.In Dy. Commr. of Commercial Taxes, Coim-bator Divn. v. Krishnaswami Mudaliar and Sons (A) this Court held that theturnover made up of amounts collected by way of tax by a registered dealer could not be assessed at all to any tax under the Act Subsequent to that the Madras Legisla...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »