Chennai Court November 1957 Judgments
In Re: K. Nataraja Pillai and Co., Through One of Its Partners, K. Nat ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-29-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Mad454; (1958)1MLJ255
Subrahmanyam, J.1. The Church of Sweden Mission Council in South India obtained an order for eviction against the petitioner. Learned Counsel for the petitioner stated that the date of the order of eviction is 25th June, 1951. On 7th March, 1951, the general body of the Church of Sweden Mission Council in South India, at a special meeting, passed a resolution resolving to change the name of the Council into the ' Church of Sweden Mission in India '. The application for eviction had apparently been made before 7th March, 1951. The Council did not have its name changed into the new style when the order for eviction was made. Under the name as it stood before the change effected on the 7th March, 1951,. the Council applied for execution of the order. The learned District Judge has held that the Council is entitled to maintain its application under its old name. I am unable to see any reason why it should not. This is not a case of transfer or devolution of interest but of a mere change of...
Tag this Judgment!M.K. Chengalvaroya Chetty Vs. State of Madras, by Collector of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-29-1957
Reported in: (1958)1MLJ253
Panchapakesa Ayyar, J.1. This batch of appeals has been filed against the judgment of the Chief Judge of the Court of Small Causes in Land Case Nos. 133, 106, 112, 111, 107, 116,113,100 and 102 of 1952, valuing the lands acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, as modified by the Town Planning Act, with No. 15 (solarium) as on 14th August, 1934, the date of the notification under Section 12 of the Town Planning Act, instead of on the date of the last extension by Government of that notification, namely, 24th October, 1946. The acquisition was for the laying of scheme roads under the Millipore western section area Town Planning Scheme.2. We have perused the records and heard the learned Counselor the appellants, and the learned Government Pleader contra. The main contention of the learned Counsel for the appellants was that the Government had no power to extend the time fixed under Section 12 of the Town Planning Act and that if the Government is to be held by an indulgence, to have the...
Tag this Judgment!T.M.K. Abdul Kassim, One of the Legal Representatives of T.M. Kadhir M ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-29-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Mad301; (1958)1MLJ268
P. Rajagopalan, O.C.J.1. This application under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of prohibition arose out of proceedings to assess the income-tax payable by T.M. Khadir Mohideen on his income during the year of account ending with 31st March, 1948, in the assessment year 1948-49. Khadir Mohideen died on 11th August, 1948. The petitioner Kassim is one of the legal representatives of the deceased Khadir Mohideen. Notices under Section 22(2) of the Income-tax Act were served on the petitioner and his brother, Syed Mohamed after the death of the assessee Khadir Mohideen. The assessment was completed in 1953. Notices of demand under Section 29 of the Act to pay the balance of the tax payable were served on the petitioner on 31st March, 1953, and on his brother on 2nd April, 1953. As the amount remained unpaid, the Income-tax Officer (first respondent) issued a certificate under Section 46(2) of the Act to the Collector of Ramanathapuram on 26th October, 1953. On 17th ...
Tag this Judgment!Raja of Sivaganga, Sole Hereditary Trustee of the Sivaganga Devasthana ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-29-1957
Reported in: (1958)2MLJ65
P. Rajagopalan, O.C.J.1. In anticipation of the abolition of the zamindari estates and other estates as defined by Madras Act I of 1908 the Madras Legislature enacted the Madras Estates Land (Reduction of Rent) Act, 1947 (XXX of 1947) to relieve immediately the tenants in the estates of the burden of what were considered to be the excessive rents they were then paying the landlords. Subsequently the Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 (XXVI of 1948) provided for the abolition of the estates themselves and for bringing those areas under the ryotwari system. A number of religious, educational and charitable institutions, 1 to which we shall hereafter refer comprehensively as institutions or religious institutions, owned such estates, which had been granted in in am for the upkeep and main I tenance of these institutions. Special provisions were made in both the Acts to main I tain what was considered by the Legislature to be a just balance between the intere...
Tag this Judgment!T. M. K. Abdul Kassim Vs. First Additional Income-tax Officer, Karaiku ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-29-1957
Reported in: [1958]33ITR466(Mad)
The judgment of court was delivered byRAJAGOPALAN, Offg. C.J. - This application under article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of prohibition arose out of proceedings to assess the income-tax payable by T.M. Khadir Mohideen on his income during the year of account ending with March 31, 1948, in the assessment year 1948-49. Khadir Mohideen died on August 11, 1948. The petitioner, Kassim, is one of the legal representatives of the deceased Khadir Mohideen. Notices under section 22(2) of the Income-tax Act were served on the petitioner and his brother, Syed Mohammed, after the death of the assessee, Khadir Mohideen. The assessment was completed in 1953. Notices of demand under section 29 of the Act to pay the balance of the tax payable were served on the petitioner on March 31, 1953, and on his brother on April 2, 1953. As the amount remained unpaid, the income-tax Officer (first respondent) issued a certificate under section 46(2) of the Act to the Collector of Ramanathap...
Tag this Judgment!Krimens Oil Mills (Private) Ltd. Vs. Registrar of Companies
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-27-1957
Reported in: (1958)2MLJ141
ORDERSubrahmanyam, J.1. The petitioner-company passed a special resolution so as to have clause (2) of its Memorandum of Association altered as follows:The Registered Office of the Company will be situate at Pondicherry.2. The company's registered office is at present in the city of Madras.3. A resolution altering the provisions of the memorandum cannot take effect, under Section 17(2) of the Indian Companies Act, 1956, until such resolution is confirmed by the Court on petition. The petitioner-company seeks confirmation of the alteration. The power which a company has to alter the provisions of the memorandum is defined in Section 17(1). The part of Section 17(1) relevant to the present petition is this:A company may, by special resolution, alter the provisions of its memorandum so as to change the place of its registered office from one State to another.4. The word 'State' is not defined in the Indian Companies Act. The word 'State' is defined in the General Clauses Act I of 1897 as ...
Tag this Judgment!Pappa Bai Vs. the State of Madras Represented by the Assistant Collect ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-26-1957
Reported in: (1958)1MLJ230
ORDERRamaswami, J.1. The dispute in this case is as regards the land acquisition compensation amount relating to a parcel of land in Tiruvarur. It is claimed by two rival people. One is by the Ramadoss Mutt represented by Trustee Govinda Dass Bava. The other claimant is one Dhanammal, a private party. Govinda Dass Bava has died during the pendency of the appeal. He has left a will dated 7th February, 1957, by which he has purported to make his daughter Pappa Bai the Matathipathi. The other side points out that Pappa Bai cannot come in as successor Matathipathi. The learned Advocate for the respondent relies for this position on my judgment in A.S. No. 57 of 1954, paragraph 796 (page 928) of Mayne's Hindu Law (eleventh edition), B.K. Mukerjee's 'Hindu Law of Religious and Charitable Trust' (Tagore Law Lectures, page 354, and Ganapathi Iyer's ' The Law Relating to Hindu and Mohamedan Endowments, second edition, page 480 and following. It is not however necessary for Pappa Bai to be the M...
Tag this Judgment!Palaniappa Chettiar and Co. and ors. Vs. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-25-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Mad317; [1959]10STC171(Mad)
ORDERRajagopala Ayyangar, J.1. At the date relevant to these petitions Article 286(3) of the Constitution ran:'(3) No law made by the Legislature of a State imposing, or authorising the imposition of a fax on the sale or purchase of any such goods as have been declared by Parliament by law to be essential for the life of the community shall have effect unless it has been reserved for the consideration of the President and has received his assent.' By virtue of the power thus vested in Parliament was enacted the Essential Goods (Declaration and Regulation of Tax on Sale Or Purchase) Act 1952 (Act 52 of 1952). The preamble to the Act stated that it was an Act to declare in pursuance of Clause (3) of Article 286 of the Constitution, certain goods to be essential for the life of the community. The operative part of this enactment was Section 3 which ran: '3. No law made after the commencement of this Act by the legislature of a State imposing or authorising the imposition of a tax on the s...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: K.R. Narayanaswami Chetty
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-25-1957
Reported in: (1958)1MLJ229
ORDERRamaswami, J.1. The Office Note is coming up for orders in the following circumstances : This S.R. No. 26480 (the unnumbered C.M.A.) is sought to be filed against the order of the Subordinate Judge of Yellore, dated 26th July, 1957, in E.A.No. 642 of 1957 in O.S. No. 82 of 1956 on his file. The application in the Court below was filed under Order 20, Rule 11(2), Civil Procedure Code, praying to permit the petitioner to pay the decree amount in instalments at Rs. 1,000 per quarter. The lower Court passed on order directing payments of Rs. 2,000 per quarter commencing from 26th October, 1957, in default of which it was made clear that the concession extended would be withdrawn. The present appeal is sought to be preferred against that order of the Subordinate Judge.2. The question for consideration posed by the office is whether a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is maintainable as contended for by the advocate for the appellant under Section 47, Civil Procedure Code.3. In regard to the r...
Tag this Judgment!Palaniappa Chettiar and Co. and ors. Vs. the Deputy Commercial Tax Off ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-25-1957
Reported in: (1960)1MLJ27
ORDERRajagopala Ayyangar, J.1. At the date relevant to these petitions Article 286(3) of the Constitution ran:(3) No law made by the Legislature of a State imposing, or authorising the imposition of a tax on the sale or purchase of any such goods as have been declared by Parliament by law to be essential for the life of the community shall have effect unless it has been reserved for the consideration of the President and has received his assent.By virtue of the power thus vested in Parliament, was enacted the Essential Goods (Declaration and Regulation of Tax on Sale or Purchase) Act, 1958 (LII of 1952). The Preamble to the Act stated that it was an Act to declare in pursuance of Clause (3) of Article 286 of the Constitution, certain goods to be essential for the life of the community. The operative part of this enactment was Section 3 which ran:3. No law made after the commencement of this Act by the Legislature of a State imposing or authorising the imposition of a tax on the sale or...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »