Chennai Court November 1958 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.
Brahmayya and Co., Official Liquidators of Hanuman Bank (In Liqn.) Vs. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-21-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Mad366; (1959)1MLJ294
Rajamannar, C.J.1. The facts which have led up to these two appeals against the judgment of Ramaswami Goundar J. in Applns. Nos. 3369 of 1952 and 3953 of 1953 are the following. The Hamiman Bank Ltd., Tanjore, went into liquidation, The petition for winding up was filed on 17-8-1947 and it was directed to be wound up on 5-11-1947. The Official Liquidators who were appointed by this Court in the winding up petition filed a suit. O. S. No. 16 of 1949, in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Kumbakonam against one Mohammedsa Rowther for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 12,620-7-0 by sale of the properties hypothecated to the bank under a mortgage bond dated 29-9-1943 and another deed dated 14-3-1944 under which the same properties were offered as security for additional amounts.The suit was filed sometime in April 1949. There was written statement by the defendant denying liability and issues were framed on 12-7-1949. When the suit was pending the Banking Companies Act, 1949 was passed and c...
H.V. JaIn Vs. the Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-20-1958
Reported in: (1959)2MLJ204
ORDERBalakrishna Ayyar, J.1. M.S. Sha Bhagajee Sonmull, Madras, was a firm of 'established importers' within the meaning of Rule 12 of the Import Trade Control Policy Rules issued by the Union Government. The firm had four partners. In 1956 the members of the firm resolved to dissolve the partnership and by an agreement executed on 26th November, 1956, the quota rights which the firm had for importing various articles were divided in equal shares among all the four ex-partners. The Import Control Rules require that information relating to any change in the constitution of a firm or its dissolution should be reported to the Chief Controller of Imports, New Delhi. Immediately after the dissolution of the firm intimation of the fact was given to the Chief Controller of Imports by a letter, dated 30th November, 1956. By an order, dated 9th April, 1957, the Chief Controller approved the transfer of the quota rights which the firm had held to its quondam partners. But he made it clear that t...
Wazir Sultan and Sons Vs. P. Satchithananda Rao and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-20-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Mad195; (1959)1MLJ244
1. These two appeals arise out of two suits filed originally in this court on its Original Side (C. S. Nos. 103 and 183 of 1954) and subsequently transferred to the City Civil Court at Madras, where they were numbered as O. S. Nos. 1453 and 1463 of 1955 respectively. Both the suits were tried together by the learned Additional Judge of the City Civil Court and decreed as prayed for. The first defendant in the two suits is the appellant in the two appeals before us. O. S. No. 1456 of 1955 is a suit to recover a sum of Rs. 26798/4/7 alleged to be due for balance of principal and interest in res-pect of a promissory note executed on 1-3-1951 by the first defendant, M/s. Wazir Sultan and Sons, a firm of merchants carrying on business at Hyderabad, in favour of the second defendant Shyamala Industries Corporation Ltd., a private limited company, for Rs. 32691/5/2 O. S. (that is, Hyderabad currency) and assigned by the second defendant to the plaintiff, Karlapaty Syamalamba, on 15-1-1954.The...
The Management of Kammavar Achukudam Ltd., Coimbatore and ors. Vs. the ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-18-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Mad364; (1959)ILLJ395Mad
ORDERBalakrishna Ayyar, J.1. This is a petition for the issue of an appropriate writ to quash an order of the Industrial Tribunal, Madras, dated 2-6-1958. The relevant facts are these : Disputes arose between the managements of some printing presses in Coimbatore and their employees in respect of three matters, In G.O. Ms. No. 2802 (Industries, Labour and Co-operation) dated 23-8-1957, the Government of Madras referred these disputes for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Madras. On 29-1-1958 the Tribunal passed an award, which was published in the Fort St. George Gazette dated 12-2-1958. The Tribunal fixed the same time scale of pay for compositors and machinemen. It fixed different scales of pay for other classes of workers. Dealing with the question of what has been described as service weightage the Tribunal directed,'For service weightage, the workers shall be deemed to have started on the scales as now fixed and one increment granted for every three years of service; but if...
In Re: Govindan Nair
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-18-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Mad544; 1958CriLJ777
Ramaswami, J.1. This appeal is preferred against the conviction and sentence by the learned Sessions Judge of Chingleput Division in Sessions Case No. 2 of 1958. 2. The accused was a Class IV Officer of the Postal Department working in the Meenambakkam Air Port Sorting Office. His duties were to open the mail bag, keep the postal articles on the sorting table and take the preliminary sorted letters for detailed sorting and keep them in the detailed sorting rack. There is no dispute that this accused was employed on the 17th, 18th and 19th February, 1957 on this work. This is proved by P.W. 3, the clerk of that office, the accused's admission and his signatures in the attendance register Ex. P-3. 3. In this case three postal articles are concerned. M.Os. 1 to 3 are the envelopes. M.O. I, Air Mail Envelope was posted at Jaffna on 17-2-1957 and M.Os. 2 Air Mail Envelopes and 3 were posted at Ipoh and Batubahat on the 15th February, 1957. They should have in the normal course reached the A...
In Re: P.S. Aravamudha Iyengar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-17-1958
Reported in: 1960CriLJ92
Ramaswami, J.1. This appeal is preferred against the conviction and sentence by the Special Judge, Tiruchirapalli, in C. C. No. 2 of 1958.2. The accused P.S. Aravamudha Aiyangar was employed as Progress Supervisor, Golden Rock Workshop, Southern Railway. It is in evidence that notwithstanding the fact that at the time of the commission of the offence in question the accused was getting a salary of Rs. 320 plus Rs, 70 dearness allowance, per month, and his. wife seems to be a musical instructor having occasional engagements : the All India Radio also, he was. not in flourshing circumstances. Till May 1957 his salary stood attached in execution of a simple money decree and he was getting only between Rs, 156 odd and Rs. 197 odd by way of nett salary.It is also possible that the accused was leading a standard of life a cut above his resources. But in these cases of corruption it is not possible, however, to find out the motive, because incorruptibility depends upon the strength of charact...
P.S. Aravamudha Iyengar Vs. the State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-17-1958
Reported in: (1959)2MLJ141
Ramaswami, J.1. This appeal is preferred against the conviction and sentence by the Special Judge, Tiruchirapalli, in C.C. No. 2 of 1958.2. The accused P.S. Aravamuda Ayyangar was employed as Progress Supervisor, Golden Rock Workshop, Southern Railway. It is in evidence that notwithstanding the fact that at the time of the commission of the offence in question the accused was getting a salary of Rs. 320 plus Rs. 70 clearness allowance, per month, and his wife seems to be a musical instructor having occasional engagements in the All India Radio also, he was not in flourishing circumstances. Till May, 1957, his salary stood attached in execution of a simple money decree and he was getting only between Rs. 156 odd and Rs. 197 odd by way of net salary. It is also possible that the accused was leading a standard of life a cut above his resources. But in these cases of corruption it is not possible, however to find out the motive, because incorruptibility depends upon the strength of charact...
Savada Gounder Vs. Veerappa Gounder
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-17-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Mad278
1. This is a revision against the decree in S. C. S. No. 141 of 1956, on the file of the Sub-Court, Dindigul. The defendant is the petitioner. The suit was laid on the basis of a promissory note dated 22-4-1951. On 23-6-1955, there was an endorsement of payment on the back of the promissory note. The suit was filed on 14-6-1956. The defendant did not appear in the lower Court and was set ex parte; a decree was passed against him as prayed for. The defendant has come up in revision.2. Mr. V. C. Srikumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner, contends that, as the acknowledgment and the endorsement of payment was made three years after the date of the promissory note, it could not avail the creditor for the purpose of saving limitation. The contention on behalf of the respondent is that, by reason of Ordinance 5 of 1953. followed by Acts 5 of 1954 and 1 of 1955 there was a period of one year, six months and twenty-six days, during which a suit could not be filed. The prohibition lasted til...
The Union of India (Uoi), by the Divisional Engineer, Telegraphs, Form ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-14-1958
Reported in: (1960)1MLJ62
Panchapakesa Ayyar, J.1. This is a petition by the Union of India for revising and setting aside the order of the District Judge, South Arcot, in C.M.P. No. 468 of 1957, who had dismissed that revision petition and confirmed the order of eviction passed against the petitioner by the Appellate Authority, the Subordinate Judge of Cuddalore, who had reversed the order of the Rent Controller who had dismissed the eviction petition in limine as not maintainable in view of a Government Order.2. The facts were briefly these : The petitioner took House No. 133, Hospital Road, Villupuram, from the landlord, Swami, the respondent herein, for running an office of the Telegraph Department. The original tenancy agreement was only to run the Office. But later on, the petitioner wanted to instal a telephone repeater-station in the premises. In spite of the objection of the respondent to the installation of that heavy machinery the repeater-station was installed in the premises, and this old house had...
Kumari C. Gabriel Vs. the State of Madras Running the National Employm ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-14-1958
Reported in: (1959)2MLJ15
ORDERBalakrishna Ayyar, J.1. This is a petition for the issue of an appropriate writ to quash the order of the Regional Director of Resettlement and Employment, Madras, dated 29th October, 1956, dismissing the petitioner from the service of the Government of India.2. Miss Gabriel the petitioner was first employed as a typist in the Chief Secretariat, Madras. Subsequently she worked as a clerk under the Hindu Law Reform Committee and later became a senior clerk in the office of the Dy. Controller-General of Civil Supplies. In course of time the petitioner was declared a quasi-permanent employee of the Central Government under the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1949. In 1955 the petitioner was working in the Regional Employment Exchange, Madras. One Mr. Pushparaj was then the head of the office, he being at the time the Regional Director of Resettlement and Employment.3. In July and August, 1955, copies of a pseudonymous communication addressed to Sri Kandhu Bhai Desai...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »