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.
Jugraj JaIn Vs. T.R. Ambikapathi Pillai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-14-1958
Reported in: (1959)2MLJ240
ORDERPanchapakesa Ayyar, J.1. This is a petition filed by one Jugraj Jain, a tenant, for revising and setting aside the order of the Rent Controller, Madras, dated 3rd April, 1956, in H.R.C No. 2959 of 1955, directing his eviction and the order of the appellate authority, the Second Judge, the Court of Small Causes, Madras, in H.R.A. No. 165 of 1956, confirming the order of eviction after calling for fresh findings from the Rent (Controller on remand.2. The facts were briefly these. Jugraj Jain, the petitioner, took premises No. '2-A, Padavatta Amman Koil Street, Kosapet, Perambur Barracks, Madras, on rent from the respondent landlord, Ambikapathi Pillai, for Rs. 70 a month in July, 1951, for his residence. Some four months later he shifted to that house a pawn-broker's business run by him and one Dharmachand Kanyalal Sowcar in partnership. Soon the house was crowded with people seeking to pawn their goods, and, the landlord, who was living upstairs in the same house, felt thoroughly i...
In Re: Annakamu Chettiar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-14-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Mad342; 1959CriLJ1084
ORDERRamaswami, J. 1. It was argued by the learned counsel Mr. Ramachandran that when the revision petitioner threatened to kill the Revenue Inspector forlawfully distraining his properties, that would notamount to the offence of assault, for which he hasbeen convicted under Section 353 I. P. C. I agree. Ifthe words had been accompanied by any gesture --but unfortunately regarding which there is no evidence -- that would certainly amount to assault. Inthis case, however, the offence would clearly fallunder Section 503 I. P. C. namely, the offence of criminal intimidation. The illustration given in this section is appropriate to this case. 'A, for the purposeof inducing B to desist from prosecuting a civil suit,threatens to burn B's house. A is guilty Of criminal intimidation.' The revision petitioner for the purposeof inducing the revenue inspector to desist from distraining his properties, threatened to kill the revenueinspector, arid therefore he is guilty of criminal intimidation. T...
In Re: T.P. Chakrapani Chetty
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-14-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Mad350; 1959CriLJ1086; (1959)1MLJ143
ORDERRamaswami, J.1. This is a reference made by the District Magistrate (Judicial), North Arcot, at Vellore, in the following circumstances.2. The Wireless Licence Inspector, Vellore, filed a complaint against the accused herein in the Court of the Sub Magistrate, Tirupattur on 3-9-1957, for having been in possession of a wireless receiving set in his residence at Tirumattur from 1-1-1955 to 23-12-1955 without a valid broadcast receiver licence, an offence punishable under Section 6 of the Wireless Telegraphy Act (XVII of 1933). The licence fee and surcharge claimed by the Indian Posts and Telegraphs Department for the year 1955 were as follows :Broadcast receiver licence fee from 1-1-1955 to 31-12-1955 .... Rs. 15-0-0 ............. Re. 1 forevery month of delay or portion there of commencing from 1-2-1955 till date of payment. By a letter dated 20-9-1957 (No. N. R. 54/T.P.T.) addressed to the Sub Magistrate, TirupaWur, the Wireless Licence Inspector represented that the Department ha...
India Coffee and Tea Distributing Co. Ltd. Vs. the State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-13-1958
Reported in: [1959]10STC359(Mad)
Subrahmanyam, J.1. Tea was sold by the plaintiff company to buyers in Europe (inclusive of the United Kingdom) and in Ireland and the United States. The contract dated 25th October, 1958, in the documents marked today may be regarded as typical of the contracts of sale. The buyers in that contract are Tea Importers Ltd., Dublin. The quantity of tea agreed to be sold had to be shipped to Dublin during November, 1948. The contract term was F.O.B. Cochin. Payment was guaranteed by an unconfirmed letter of credit at sight to be opened through the Bank of Ireland for advice to National Bank of India Ltd., Madras. The way the contract was performed was for the plaintiff to put the tea in a steamer in the Port of Cochin, take a bill of lading and, in appropriate cases, have the goods insured on the buyers' behalf and prepare an invoice and present the bill of lading, the invoice and the policy of insurance at the branch of the National Bank of India at Madras. The National Bank pays the price...
In Re: S. Moses and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-13-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Mad185; 1959CriLJ608
Panchapakesa Ayyar, J. 1. These two cases have been directed to be posted before this Bench by the Honourable the Chief Justice on a reference by Somasundaram J., as to whether a servant selling goods on behalf of his master will fall primarily and directly within the scope of the penal provisions of Sections 7 and 16 of Act 37 of 1954, the Prevention of FoodAdulteration Act, as Somasundaram J., who had been prima facie, of the view that the servant wilt also be absolutely liable primarily and directly for the sale of adulterated food on behalf of the master in two cases decided by him, sitting singly, (Criminal Appeal Nos. 84 and 138 of 1957), both ex parte felt some doubt about the correctness of his view regarding the law, and wanted it to be clarified and settled by a Bench. 2. The facts in these two cases are briefly these: There is a Society called the Government Servants' Co-operative Society, Mettur Township, Salem District. The first accused, Moses, was the manager of the Co-o...
India Coffee and Tea Distributing Co. Ltd. Vs. the State of Madras Rep ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-13-1958
Reported in: (1959)2MLJ222
Subrahmanyam, J.1. Tea was sold by the plaintiff-company to buyers in Europe (inclusive of the United Kingdom) and in Ireland and the United States. The contract, dated 25th October, 1948, in the documents marked today may be regarded as typical of the contracts of sale. The buyers in that contract are Tea Importers Ltd., Dublin. The quantity of tea agreed to be sold had to be shipped to Dublin during November, 1948. The contract terms was F.O.B. Cochin. Payment was guaranteed by an unconfirmed letter of credit at sight to be opened through the Bank of Ireland for advice to National Bank of India Ltd., Madras. The way the contract was performed was for the plaintiff to put the tea in a steamer in the Port of Cochin, take a bill of lading and in, appropriate cases, have the goods insured on the buyer's behalf and prepare an invoice and present the bill of lading, the invoice and the policy of insurance at the branch of the National Bank of India at Madras. The National Bank pays the pri...
T.V. Sundaram Iyengar and Sons Ltd., Madurai Vs. Commissioner of Incom ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-13-1958
Reported in: AIR1960Mad96; [1959]37ITR26(Mad)
Balakrishna Ayyar, J.(1) In both these cases the facts are similar and the question for determination is the same. We shall therefore deal with both the cases together.(2) T.V. Sundaram Ayyangar and Sons Ltd., the assessee in R. C. No. 91 of 1953, is a private limited company carrying on business among other things in the purchase and sale of motor ears, spares and accessories. It also acts as the managing agent of several allied transport companies. In November 1945, the assessee had on hand 15 lorries, six taxis and four delivery vans. At that time there was before the business world a scheme sponsored by the Central and State Governments to co-ordinate road and rail transport.In furtherance of this scheme a company called the Southern Roadways Ltd., was floated. It was incorporated on 13-9-1946 and it obtained the certificate of commencement of business on 15-9-1946. The assessee was the Managing Agent of the Southern Roadways Ltd. In November 1946 the assessee sold its entire fleet...
The Public Prosecutor Vs. S. Joseph
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-12-1958
Reported in: (1960)1MLJ334
Ramaswami, J.1. The accused S. Joseph was convicted under Section 471 read with Section 466, Indian Penal Code, by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge of Tiruchirapalli Division in Sessions Case Nos. 80 and 81 of 1957, and sentenced to R.I. for two years. On appeal the learned Sessions Judge of Tiruchirapalli in C.A. No. 177 of 1957 has acquitted the accused. Hence this appeal by the State.2. The facts are : Sometime in June, 1956, the Government imposed control over the distribution of cement, obviously, as the production was insufficient to cope with the demand. The Cement Stockists could supply and sell without permit only 15 per cent, of the stock supplied to them by the manufacturers. They should supply or sell the remaining 85 per cent, of the stock only as against permits issued by the competent authority. The Government authorised the District Collector, and, or the Personal Assistant to issue permits for sale of cement between r to 5 tons and the Tahsildar of the Taluk concer...
In Re: Thirunavukkarasu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-12-1958
Reported in: (1959)2MLJ11
ORDERRamaswami, J.1. This revision is sought to be filed against the order made by the ex officio First Class Magistrate, Chidambaram, in M.C. No. 2 of 1958, under Section 117(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. In this case security proceedings under Section 109 of the Code of Criminal Procedure have been taken against 22 persons on a report of the Criminal Inspector of Police, Kurinjipadi. The order in writing made under Section 112 sets out the substance of the information received, the amount of the bond to be executed, the term for which it is to be in force and the sureties required. The learned Magistrate has then proceeded under Section 117(3) and has taken interim bonds. The present revision is preferred against that order directing the execution of interim bonds. The grounds on which this revision is preferred are twofold viz., that there was no necessity to take interim bonds ; and secondly, part of the information itemised against the counter-petitioners as constituting...
In Re: Arusami Goundan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-12-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Mad274; 1959CriLJ852
1. The Additional Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, has convicted the appellant under Section 363. I. P. C., read with Section 109 I. P. C., and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years.2. The case for the prosecution, so far as it is now material may be summarised extremely briefly. One Kolandaiappa Goundar of Narasapuram village had incurred the enmity of a number of his castemen in his village. So he left Narasapuram and took up residence in the house of his sister, Devakkal, P. W. 23, in Gandhipuram. But his enemies were resolved to take his life. So they arranged that he should be persuaded to attend' a late cinema show so that on his way back he could be murdered at some suitable spot. For some reason or other two such schemes miscarried.3. Sometime in the evening of 26-8-1956, the deceased went to inspect a plot of land which he intended to purchase. One Nanjappa accompanied the deceased. Immediately before he set out in company with the deceased, Nanjappa asked ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »