Chennai Court October 1957 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.
S. Basker and Co. by Managing Partner, M.S.P.S. Sankaralinga Nadar Vs. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-21-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Mad379; (1957)2MLJ582
Subrahmanyam, J.1. This petition is preferred against the Judgment of the District: Judge, Mathurai, in C.M.A. No. 19 of 1954 confirming the order passed by the Sub- ordinate Judge of Dindigul dismissing I.P. No. 1 of 1952.2. The petitioner, as creditor of the respondents, filed I.P. No. 1 of 1952 that the respondent be adjudged insolvents. The learned Subordinate Judge and the District Judge held that the debt due to the petitioner by the respondents was, on the petitioner's own allegations, not a liquidated sum, and that, therefore, under Section 9(i)(b) of the Provincial Insolvency Act, V of 1920, the petitioner was not entitled to present the petition. The point is whether the debt on the basis of which the petitioner sought the adjudication of the respondents is not a liquidated sums.3. Since the issue as to the maintainability of the petition was heard as a preliminary issue in the Courts below, we should assume that the facts bearing on that issue stated in the petition are true...
P. Veerana thevar Vs. Karuppayi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-18-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Mad37; (1958)IMLJ429
Ganapatia Pillai, J.1. The appellant in this second appeal was the plaintiff in a suit for redemption of a usufructuary mortgage, Ex. A-4 of the year 1917. His case was that the mortgaged property belonged to one Mayandi Thevar who had mortgaged it usufructuarily in favour of one Chinna Thevar for Rs. 125 in 1917 and he was the purchaser of the equity of redemption. This Chinna Thevar is the deceased husband of the first defendant in the suit. In 1927 the mortgagee Chinna Thevar executed a sub-othi Ex. A-5 of the suit property in favour of his younger brother the second defendant. The third defendant in the suit is a still younger brother of the mortgagee under Ex. A-4. The main contest was raised by the third defendant who contended that he was the owner of the property in dispute having acquired it in an oral partition in his family and also by adverse possession.The truth and genuineness of the mortgages Exs. A-4 and A-5 were also put in issue. The trial Court found that Exs. A-4 an...
Nanjappa Asari
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-18-1957
Reported in: (1958)2MLJ230
Ramaswami, J.1. This is a second appeal sought to be preferred against the decree and judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge of Coimbatore in A.S. No. 196 of 1956, confirming the decree and judgment of the learned District Munsif of Coimbatore in O.S. No. 417 of 1955.2. The facts are : One Velayudha Asari died leaving surviving him two widows, Under his last will and testament he gave the two widows certain amounts as maintenance and deducting certain expenses, mentioned that one-third of the income was to bet paid to the plaintiff in this suit. After the death of the widows one-third of the properties itself was made to vest in the plaintiff. The present defendant Angammal applied for letters of administration with the will annexed. On caveat being entered by the opposite party, the proceedings were registered as O.S. No. 116 of 1942. Letters of administration with the will annexed was granted to Angammal; seel Exhibit A-6, dated 9th March, 1944. Subsequently this plaintiff had fil...
Venkatachalam Chettiar Vs. Umayal Achi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-16-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Mad395; (1958)2MLJ26
Ganapatia Pillai, J.1. The appellant before me is the first defendant in the suit in which the first respondent had obtained a decree for money against the assets of the deceased, father of the first defendant. After several execution petitions had proved unsuccessful E.P. No. 85 of 1952 was instituted by the first respondent on the eve of expiry of the twelve year period of limitation against the appellant and other persons who were impleaded as garnishees. The reliefs claimed in the execution petition fell under two categories. The first related to the attachment and sale of certain moveable properties on the footing that they belonged to the deceased debtor, namely, the father of the first defendant. The second category of relief related to a prohibitory order in respect of certain debts belonging to the deceased debtor in the hands of certain persons who were impleaded as parties to the execution petition. In the course of the counter statements filed by the appellant and also by t...
V. Guruviah Naidu and Brothers Vs. the State of Madras and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-14-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Mad158; (1958)IMLJ132; [1958]9STC145(Mad)
Rajagopala Ayyangar, J.1. The petitioner is a dealer in hides and skins who has been assessed to sales tax under the Madras General Sales Tax Act and he has filed these two petitions for the issue of writs of certiorari and mandamus, certiorari to quash the order of assessment and mandamus to direct the taxing authorities to forbear from enforcing the provisions of the Act for the reason that the assessment proceedings are ultra vires and, therefore, illegal.2. V. Guruviah Naidu and Brothers, the petitioners, carry on business as tanners and dealers in hides and skins in Coimbatore. To enable them to deal in those goods they got themselves registered as licensed dealer from the commencement of the Madras General Sales Tax Act right up to the end of the financial year 1951-52, They did not choose to take out licence from and after 1st April, 1952. Taking out of such licences was not obligatory under the relevant provisions of the Madras General Sales Tax Rules, 1939, until they were ame...
R. Thangaraja Pandian Vs. Veeraraghava Iyengar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-14-1957
Reported in: (1958)1MLJ69
P. Rajagopala Ayyangar, J.1. The estate of Panayur in Tirunelveli district was notified and taken over by Government under the provisions of the Estate Abolition Act XXVI of 1948, and advance compensation therefor totalling Rs. 14,940 was deposited with the Estates Abolition Tribunal, Madurai. Thereafter the respondent before us made a claim under Section 42 for the payment to him of a sum of Rs. 5,383-10-0 out of the amount thus deposited. This claim has been upheld in part by the Tribunal, which has directed payment to the respondent of Rs. 945-7-2 to be made, and it is this decision of the Tribunal whose correctness is challenged in this appeal by the proprietor, the ' principal landholder ' of the estate.2. The claim of the respondent preferred under Section 42 numbered as O.P. No. 571 of 1952 was based on these facts.From time immemorial the mahajanas, the pangalis of the applicant were entitled to a melwaram of 6 1/2 kottahs of seed land as dhilta manibam, the respondent being en...
K.M. Adam Vs. the Income-tax Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-14-1957
Reported in: (1958)1MLJ34
ORDERRajagopala Ayyangar, J.1. K.M. Adam, the petitioner, is a dealer in skins. He was assessed to income-tax for the years 1948-1949 to 1953-1954. The quantum of the tax levied in these assessments was disputed, by the petitioner, assessee, but that is not material for the present petition. What, however, is of relevance is that as a result of these assessments a sum of over Rs. 3,00,000 was found due from the petitioner as arrears of income-tax.2. The petitioner had for the purpose of his business opened an overdraft account with the Indian Bank, Ltd., for which he had pledged with them, his stock of hides and skins. The limit set to the overdraft by the Bank was at Rs. 1,37,500. On the date relevant to the present petition the assessee had drawn on this account a sum of Rs. 1,31,301-2-1 and this sum was shown in the books of the Bank as debit to his account. While so, the Additional Income-tax Officer, Second Circle, Madras, who is the respondent in this petition, served a notice on...
Gordon Woodroffe and Company (Private) Limited Vs. S. Venugopal and an ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-14-1957
Reported in: (1958)1MLJ164
ORDERRajagopala Ayyangar, J.1. The principal, if not the only point raised in these two writ petitions which seek the issue of writs of certiorari to quash two orders of the Industrial Tribunal, Madras, is as to the proper construction of Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act (XIV of 1947) as enacted by the Amending Central Act XXXVI of 1956.2. Messrs. Gordon Woodroffe & Company are the petitioners in these two writ petitions. There was an industrial dispute between the petitioners, management, and their workmen regarding the quantum of bonus for the year ended 30th June, 1956. The dispute was referred for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunals, Madras, by the State Government by their Order, dated 17th April, 1957. The Tribunal decided this dispute by its order, dated 19th July, 1957, but the decision of the Tribunal on this dispute is not relevant to the present proceedings but the petition is concerned with certain events which transpired during the pendency of this industrial...
S. Raju Gramani Vs. Srinivasa Gramani
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-14-1957
Reported in: (1958)1MLJ308
Basheer Ahmed Sayeed, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition is against the order of the learned first Assistant City Civil Judge, appointing a Commissioner directing him to find out the market value of the suit property in O.S. No. 1853 of 1955 on the file of this Court. The suit is for eviction of the defendant from the property. The defendant filed his written statement, but in the written statement he did not raise the question of inadequacy of the Court-fee paid for the suit. After the written statement having been filed, in a petition supported by an affidavit, the defendant raised an issue with regard to the proper Court-fee for the suit. After hearing the parties, the learned First Assistant City Civil Judge appointed a Commissioner to find out the market value of the suit property. In this Civil Revision Petition objection is taken by the plaintiff that the defendant, not having pleaded in his written statement that the Court-fee paid was inadequate, was precluded from raising the ...
K. M. Adam Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ii Additional Ii Circle, Madras.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-14-1957
Reported in: [1958]33ITR26(Mad)
ORDERK. M. Adam, the petitioner, is a dealer in skins. He was assessed to income-tax for the years 1948-49 to 1953-54. The quantum of the tax levied in these assessments was disputed by the petitioner-assessee, but that is not material for the present petition. What, however, is of relevance is that as a result of these assessments a sum of over Rs. 3 lakhs found due from the petitioner as arrears of income-tax.The petitioner had for purpose of his business opened an overdraft account with Indian Bank Ltd., for which he had pledged with them his stock of hides and skins. The limit set to the overdraft by the bank was at Rs. 1,37,500. On the date relevant to the present petition the assessee had drawn on this account a sum of Rs. 1,31,301-2-1 and this sum was shown in the books of the bank as debit to his account. While so, the Additional Income-tax Officer, Second Circle, Madras, who is the respondent in this petition, served a notice on 19th November, 1955, on the Indian Bank under se...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »