Chennai Court December 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.
The Panchayat Board C. Mutlur by President Vs. the Regional Inspector ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-09-1957
Reported in: (1958)2MLJ221
ORDERRajagopala Ayyangar, J.1. The revenue village of C. Mutlur was declared 'a village' under the Madras Village Panchayats Act, 1950 (X of 1950) and a panchayat board was constituted for carrying on the local administration of that village. This revenue village really consisted of more than one part namely the main village of C. Mutlur and a hamlet nearby by name Theethampalayam. The village and the hamlet are separated by the river Vellar which passes through the revenue village.2. The Regional Inspector of Municipal Councils and Local Boards, Chingleput, published two notifications on 8th October, 1955, for effecting the separation of the hamlet from 'the revenue village' and for constituting the former as a separate area to be administered by a separate Panchayat Board. The legality of this action on the part of the officer is challenged in this petition by the Panchayat Board of C. Mutlur. The two notifications whose validity is impugned, both, dated 8th October, 1955, are in the...
In Re: R. Krishnan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-06-1957
Reported in: (1958)1MLJ189
ORDERRajagopala Ayyangar, J.1. The petitioner who is seeking enrolment as an Advocate of this Court has filed this petition praying for the order that he might be exempted from payment of the Stamp duty payable for the entry of his name as an Advocate of this Court.2. The petitioner is a graduate in law of this University and was enrolled as an Advocate of the former Mysore High Court when Mysore was a ' Part B ' on. 20th January, 1955. He states that he was admitted to the roll of that Court on payment of Rs. 300 which was prescribed by the Mysore Stamp Act then in force. After Mysore became a ' Part A ' State as a result of the States Reorganisation Act the petitioner became an Advocate of the Mysore High Court under the proviso to Section 53(2) of the States Reorganisation Act. He claims that as he has been enrolled as an Advocate of a High Court--the Mysore High Court-he is exempt from the payment of any Stamp duty under Article 25 of Schedule I-A of the Stamp Act as amended in the...
The Gemini Pictures Circuit, Limited Vs. the Commissioner of Income-ta ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-06-1957
Reported in: (1958)2MLJ6
ORDERRajagopala Ayyangar, J.1. The questions arising for consideration both in the: reference under Section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act as well as in W.P. No. 925 of 1955 are identical and relate to the proper Rule to be applied for determining the amortisation of films for computing the income, profits and gains of the assessee which is carrying on business as a film distributor. The assessee in the Referred Case No. 27 of 1955 is the Petitioner in the Writ Petition.2. It would be convenient to deal first with the Referred Case No. 27 of 1955 before adverting to the points raised in the Writ Petition.3. The Gemini Pictures Circuit, Limited, Madras, a private limited company is the assessee in question and the reference is in relation to the assessment year 1950-1951. The Company was incorporated on 1st April, 1946 and took over the business of Gemini Pictures Circuit a proprietary concern owned by Sri S.S. Vasan. The Company has been carrying on business as producers, distributors and...
V. Seshi Ammal Vs. United India Life Insurance Co., Ltd. and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-06-1957
Reported in: (1958)2MLJ53
Subrahmanyam, J.1. The Respondent's husband disappeared from his home in 1946. He was then in a disordered state of mind. Persons who would have heard of him if he had been alive had not heard of him when the respondent filed Application No. 1880 of 1955. To that application, she made certain insurance companies, which held policies on his life, respondents. One of these insurance companies was the National Indian Life Insurance Company. In that company, the respondent's husband had a policy for Rs 5,000. The company's interest has now devolved on the Life Insurance Corporation. This application is made by the Life Insurance Corporation.2. In Application No. 1880 of 1955 the respondent prayed for an order (1) declaring that her husband Venkatarama Ayyar must be presumed to have died on or after 16th March, 1953, on the expiry of 7 years from the date of disappearance on 16th March, 1946 and that she was the sole beneficiary under the insurance policies mentioned in Application No. 1880...
Gemini Pictures Circuit Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-06-1957
Reported in: [1958]33ITR547(Mad)
RAJAGOPALA AYYANGAR, J. - The question arising for consideration both in the reference under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act as well as in W.P. No. 925 of 1955 are identical and relate to the proper rule to be applied for determining the amortisation of films for computing the income, profits and gains of the assessee which is carrying on business as a film distributor. The assessee in the Reference Case No. 27 of 1955 is the petitioner in the writ petition.It would be convenient to deal first with the Reference Case No. 27 of 1955 before adverting to the points raised in the writ petition.The Gemini Pictures Circuit, Limited, Madras, a private limited company, is the assessee in question and the reference is in relation to the assessment year 1950-51. The company was incorporated on 1st April, 1946, and took over the business of Gemini Pictures Circuit, a proprietary concern, owned by Sri S. S. Vasan. The company has been carrying on business as producers, distributors and ...
State of Madras Represented by Collector of Madras Vs. Balaji Chettiar ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-05-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Mad16; (1958)IIMLJ330
1. These are sixty five appeals and four memoranda of cross-objections, and relate to two big Land Acquisitions resulting in the two batches of appeals and memoranda of cross objections. The first big land acquisition is what can be shortly called the Mandavalli scheme, for building houses by the Madras City Improvement Trust. This covers an area of 1400 grounds of land bounded on the east by the South Beach Road, on the west by Broadies Road, on the north by Mandavalli street and the Mada Church Road, and on the south by the Adyar river backwaters.The properties acquired are mostly vacant lands, but in some of the cases there were also structures, like houses and compound walls, and in some also wells for which compensation was claimed and awarded. The date of the notification under Section 47 of the City Improvement Trust Act of 1945. which was held by the Land Acquisition Officer to be the relevant date for determining the market valuation of the lands, as under Section 4(1) of the ...
Narasimha Chettiar Vs. Muthuswami Gounder and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-04-1957
Reported in: (1958)2MLJ216
ORDERRamaswami, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition and the Application for stay arise from an order made by the Sub-Collector of Pollachi in C.M.C. No. 64 of 1957.2. The facts are. - The lands involved in these proceedings are said to belong to Rajalakshmi Ammal. The cultivating tenant of these lands was Muthuswami Gounder. Bangaruswami Chettiar, the son of Rajalakshmi Ammal, filed an application under Section 3(4)(a) of the Madras Act XXV of 1955 in C.M.C. No. 43 of 1956, before the Sub-Collector, Pollachi, for evicting Muthuswami Gounder on the ground of non-payment of arrears of rent. In that application Bangaruswami Chettiar testified that the land in question belonged to him by virtue of a partition. The learned Sub-Collector recorded evidence let in by both sides and came to the conclusion that there were no arrears of rent due from Muthuswami Gounder and dismissed the application.3. Subsequently Rajalakshmi Ammal who is said to have gone on a pilgrimage to Benares in the course o...
Asher Textiles Ltd. Vs. the Industrial Tribunal and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-04-1957
Reported in: (1958)2MLJ102
ORDERRajagopala Ayyangar, J.1. The controversy between the parties which calls for decision is as regards the legality of an order of the Industrial Tribunal, Coimbatore, in petition No. 64 of 1955 on its file.2. The petitioners are Messrs. Asher Textiles Ltd. They were parties to an industrial dispute between themselves and their workers which had been referred for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Coimbatore, I.D. No. 13 of 1952. This writ petition is concerned with matters that transpired between the petitioners and one of their workmen, Subbaraman (2nd respondent) here who will hereafter be referred to as the respondent. Subbaraman was originally employed as a blow-room, clerk and while so the management transferred him to the post of a clerk in the despatch and filing Section. It was a common case that this transfer did not injuriously affect the grade, pay or future prospects of this employee. The respondent, however, refused to accept the transfer on the ground that it wa...
Chokkalingam Pillai and anr. Vs. Pechi Ammal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-03-1957
Reported in: (1958)2MLJ211
Ramaswami, J.1. This appeal is preferred against the decree and judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge of Mathurai in A.S. No. 57 of 1952, reversing the decree and judgment of the learned District Munsif, Tirumangalam, in O.S. No. 223 of 9492. The appellants before me are the reversioners to the estate of one Poovatha Pillai. His widow was Shanmugathammal. Between 1943 and 1948, Shanumuga-thammal made a number of alienations, in regard to which we are concerned in this appeal with four alienations. She died on 17th October, 1948. The suit has been filed by the reversioners to the estate of Poovatha Pillai for possession and other appropriate reliefs.3. The alienations which are the subject-matter of consideration before us are comprised in Exhibits B-8, B-10, B-20 and B-34.4. Exhibit B-8 is dated 13th August, 1947 and covers items 1 and 1(a). It is executed in favour of defendants 2 and 3 for As. 500. One of the items of consideration is the discharge of an othi for Rs. 120 executed...
Ahmed Moideen Khan and Ors. vs. Inspector of 'D' Division
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Mad261; 1959CriLJ731; (1958)IIMLJ123
1. These are two petitions for setting aside the orders of the Sessions Judge of Madras in Crl. M.P. Nos. 7 and 9 of 1957, on his file, transferring C. C. Nos. 96 and 2014 of 1957 from the file of the V Presidency Magistrate, Madras, to the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Madras, for being tried and disposed of by himself or by some Magistrate named by him other than the V Presidency Magistrate, These petitions first came up for hearing before Somasundaram J. but, owing to an important constitutional question raised by the petitioners, viz, the alleged absence of jurisdiction in the Sessions Judge, Madras, to entertain transfer applications in respect of cases pending before the Presidency Magistrates of Madras, Somasundaram J. directed these two cases to be posted before a Bench. That is how these petitions have come before us.2. We may now state briefly the facts which are a bit tangled and go back to a period of more than a year and are necessary, according to Mr. Vaz, the learned coun...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›