Chennai Court April 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.
Vyapuri Moopan Vs. Sethurama Iyer and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-03-1958
Reported in: (1958)2MLJ519
Panchapakesa Ayyar, J.1. These are two connected appeals against the judgment and decree of Rajagopala Ayyangar, J., in Writ Petitions Nos. 1095 and 724 of 1956 before him. The petitions were filed by the landlords, Sethurama Iyer and Rajam-mal, for quashing the orders of the Revenue Court directing them to restore possession of certain lands to some mattuvaramdars Vayyapuri and Shanmugham, the respondents herein. The judgment of Rajagopala Ayyangar, J., discussed the cases of mattuvaramdars and kaieruvaramdars who claimed to be cultivating tenants who had cultivated lands for the agriculture year 1953 54 and therefore claimed to be entitled to restoration to possession as they satisfied the requirements of Madras Act XXV of 1955 and whose claims was allowed by the Revenue Court. Rajagopala Ayyangar, J., after elaborately discussing the evidence, and the various qualifications required before making a person a ' cultivating tenant' within the meaning of Act XXV of 1955 (and the succeed...
The Public Prosecutor Vs. V.M. Ramalingam Pillai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-02-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Mad544; (1958)IIMLJ243; [1958]9STC510(Mad)
ORDER1. On the answer returned by the Full Bench the acquittal by the lower Court cannot stand. The acquittal is set aside, and the accused is convicted for an offence punishable under Section 15(b) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939. He is fined Rs. 25 (Rupees twenty-five only) and the recovery of arrears of tax of Rs. 205-12-6 is directed to be made. It will be recoverable as if it were a fine....
Natesan Alias Krishna Goundan Vs. Deputy Commissioner, Hindu Religious ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-02-1958
Reported in: (1958)2MLJ555
ORDERBalakrishna Ayyar, J.1. This is a petition for the issue of an appropriate writ to quash an order of the Deputy Commissioner for Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments, Madras, dated 17th August, 1957. The relevant facts are these:2. One Raji Goundan was appointed as a trustee of the Ellayamman Temple in Tirupathur town by the Area Committee by its Resolution No. 186, dated 23rd April, 1956. He then filed an application under Section 87 of the Act for the issue of a certificate on the strength of which he could approach the Magistrate and obtain possession of certain properties which he said belonged to the temple and of which, according to him, Natesan alias Krishna Goundan, the petitioner before this Court, was in wrongful possession. The order of the Deputy Commissioner proceeds on the footing ' The Respondent (Natesan alias Krishna Goundan) is the poojari of the temple'. Natesan alias Krishna Goundan also appears to have stated before the Deputy Commissioner that the proper...
P. Kuttikrishna Nair Vs. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras and anr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-02-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Mad108; [1958]34ITR540(Mad); (1958)2MLJ601
Balakrishna Ayyar, J. 1. These are two petitions for the issue of appropriate writs to quash the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras dated 3-1-1957, and made under Section 35 of the Income-tax Act. W. P. no. 649 of 1957 relates to the assessment year 1948-49 and W. P. No. 650 of 1957 relates to the assessment year 1916-47.2. The material facts ore these : The petitioner is a businessman at Kozhikode whose name has been on the files of the Income-tax Officer, Kozhikode since the assessment year 1942-43. In pursuance of a memo dated 3-5-1945, issued by the Income-tax Officer, the petitioner appeared before him on 26-6-1945 with his accounts, and he also filed his trading and profit and loss statements. The Officer examined the accounts in detail and ultimately dropped proceedings as he was then satisfied that the petitioner's income was below the taxable limit.3. For the assessment years 1945-46, 1946-47, 11947-48 and 1948-49, the Income-tax Officer made assessments under ...
W. K. Sreenivasalu Naidu Vs. Collector of Madras, and Another.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-1958
Reported in: [1958]34ITR301(Mad)
ORDERIn July 1953 the petitioner voluntarily filed returns of income for the six years 1948-49 to 1953-54 before the II Additional Income-tax Officer, Fourth Circle, Madras. On various dates in January, April and June, 1956, the Income-tax Officer made assessments in respect of the income for the years 1951-52, 1952-53 and 1953-54. He also issued notices to the petitioner to show cause why penalty should not be levied on him for his failure to submit a true estimate of his income for each of the years under section 18A of the Act. The petitioner made his representations to the Income-tax Officer and contended that there had been no concealment of income in any manner. Nevertheless, the Income-tax Officer levied penalties amounting to Rs. 2,090 for 1951-52, Rs. 1,715 for 1952-53 and Rs. 370 for 1953-54. The petitioner appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax who dismissed it by an order made on 7th November, 1957. Thereafter, the Income-tax Officer issued a certifi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›