Chennai Court July 1958 Judgments
Union of India (Uoi) Owning the Southern Railway by Its General Manage ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-30-1958
Reported in: (1958)2MLJ528
Ramaswami, J.1. This Second Appeal is preferred against the decree and judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge of Tiruchirapalli in A.S. No. 251 of 1954, modifying the decree and judgment of the learned District Munsif of Karur, in O.S. No. 426 of 1952. The plaintiff firm undertook to supply 1,000 tins of gingelly oil in two loads, 500 at Erode and 500 at Karur. Both the Courts have found that there was default on the part of the plaintiff in regard to the supply of 280 tins of gingelly oil. On this default the defendant, the Southern Railway, forfeited a sum of Rs. 1,840 which had been given as security by the plaintiff-firm for the fulfilment of the terms of the contract.2. How this sum of Rs. 1,840 came to be deposited as security deposit was as follows: The terms of the contract are to be found in Exhibits A-i and B-i. Before submitting the tender to qualify one to become a tenderer, he must deposit a sum of Rs. 1,000 as earnest money. If his tender is not accepted, the amount wi...
Tag this Judgment!Kali Ammal Vs. the Manager, Sri Ranga Vilas Mills
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-25-1958
Reported in: (1958)2MLJ550
Ganapatia Pillai, J.1. This is an appeal against the order of the Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Madras, refusing to pay any compensation to the appellant for the death of her husband; The appellant is the widow of one Kanniappan who was employed as a switchboard assistant in the power-house of Sri Ranga Vilas Mills, Ltd., Peelamedu, Coimbatore. He went to work in the Mills as usual on 20th January, 1955 and the evidence is that he was found lying at about 9-15 or 9-45 A.M. near the water-tank 100 yards distant from the place where the doffing boys of the Mill were working. The workman was taken to the Mill Hospital and after some medical attention was given there he was taken to the Headquarters Hospital at about 11 or 11-30 A.M. There Dr. Kalyanaraman of that hospital examined him and diagnoised the complaint as sub-arachnoid haemorrhage. According to this doctor this haemorrhage can occur either spontaneously without any cause or as a result of blood diseases or...
Tag this Judgment!K. Subbaroya Mudali and anr. Vs. K. Velappa Mudali and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-25-1958
Reported in: (1958)2MLJ591
Ramaswami, J.1. This is an appeal preferred against the Decree and Judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge of Chingleput in A.S. No. 4 of 1955, confirming the Decree and Judgment of the learned District Munsif of Kancheepuram in O.S. No. 275 of 1951.2. The dispute in this case relates to the Kumbabishekam ceremony of the renovated Selvavinayagar temple in Vilakadi Koil Thope Street.3. Both the Courts have found that the plaintiffs and the defendants who are Sengunthar residents of Vilakadi Koil Street, Velikkaipattarari Street and Vilakadi Koil Thope Street, and to whom Selvavinayagar seems to be the tutelar deity, are the joint owners of this temple. This is a village community temple, though situated in a suburb which is naturally growing and taking in villages around Kancheepuram. The residents of these three streets have been making collections, renovated the Selvavinayagar Temple and were making arrangements for the Kumbabishekam or the renovation ceremony. The Kumbabishekam cer...
Tag this Judgment!T.M. Abdul Rahim and Co., Maharaja Beedi Factory, Renipet Vs. the Secr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-24-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Mad212; (1958)2MLJ575
ORDERRajagopalan, J.1. The petitioner applied under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of certiorari to set aside the award of the Industrial Tribunal in I. D. No. 16 of 1957.2. The petitioner-company manufactures and sells beedis. It resisted the claim of the Union, the first respondent, which represented the labourers, who did the manual work of rolling the beedis, for enhanced remuneration for their services. The labourers were paid Rs. 1-4-0 for every 1000 biddis they rolled. All the material was supplied by the company. They claimed enhanced remuneration at Rs. 2-4-0 per 1000. The claim was referred as an industrial dispute under Section 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act for adjudication by the Industrial Tribunal.In the course of the proceedings before the Tribunal, the company (petitioner) contended among other things (I) that the labourers were not 'workmen' as defined by Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act; that the dispute between the compan...
Tag this Judgment!Janab S. Ahmed HussaIn and Sons, Three Lotus Beedi Factory, Fort, Sale ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-24-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Mad221; (1958)IILLJ606Mad
ORDERRajagopalan, J. 1. The petitioners in each of these two cases are the proprietors of an industrial concern in Salem District engaged in the manufacture and sale of beedis. The manual labour of rolling beedis was done by persons to whom it should be convenient to refer as the beedi rollers. Between the proprietors and the beedi rollers intervened a set of persons; known to the industry as 'contractors', but whom I' shall refer to for the purposes of this judgment ad intermediaries, a less controversial nomenclature. 2. Theusand beedis rolled constituted the unit of work on the basis of which a beedi roller was paid for his work. Who paid that amount and who was legally bound to pay are questions to which I shall advert later. Till October 1956 the beedi roller was paid Rs. 1-6-0 for every unit of large becdis and Rs. 1-8-0 for every unit of beedis of small size rolled by him. The rates were increased to Rs. 1-14-0 and Rs. 2-0-0 respectively in October 1956. In July-August 1957, the...
Tag this Judgment!The Coimbatore Spinning and Weaving Co. Ltd. Vs. M.S. Srinivasan Chart ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-24-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Mad229; (1959)1MLJ254
ORDERBalakrishna Ayyar, J.1. This is a petition for the issue of a writ prohibiting the first respondent Mr. M.S. Srinivasan from holding an enquiry and conducting an investigation into the affairs of the Coimbatore Spinning and Weaving Co. Ltd., jn pursuance of an order dated 10-4-1957 made by the Government of India.2. The relevant facts are these. In May 1956 one Parameswara Iyer, a share-holder in the Coimbatore Spinning and Weaving Company Ltd. wrote to the Registrar of Companies a letter in which he made various allegations against the management. He said that the Managing Agents'have since their assumption of office been acting most selfishly jeopardising the interests of the company and have by frauds, misfeasance, misconduct, misappropriation and falsification of accounts and various other acts in contravention of law unduly enriched themselves at the expense and loss of the company causing loss not only to members but also to the Government by suppressing the true income and ...
Tag this Judgment!The Tamilnad Non-gazetted Government Officers Union, Madras and anr. V ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-23-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Mad55; (1958)2MLJ395
1. This is a reference at the instance of the Registrar of this court as to whether the proposed appeal should validly be entertained on the appellate side of this court. Certain ministerial employees of the Government departments formed themselves into an association known as the Tamilnadu Non-Gazetted Government Officers' Union and applied to the Registrar of Trade Unions, Madras, the respondent heroin, for registration of their association as a trade union under the Indian Trade Unions Act, XVI of 1926.The Registrar declined to register the Union. Thereupon the Tamilnad Non-Gazetted Government Officers' Union (assuming for the present purpose that it is a legal entity even before registration) and one T. S. Krishnaiah filed an appeal on the appellate side of this court purporting to be under Section 11 of the Indian Trade Union Act. The office took objection that an appeal under Section 11 of the Indian Trade Union Act is entertainable only on the original side of this Court. As the...
Tag this Judgment!V. Gopal Stores by Proprietor, V. Gopal Vs. A. Arunachala Naicker
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-23-1958
Reported in: (1958)2MLJ617
Ramachandra Iyer, J.1. This is a revision at the instance of the landlord of premises No. 543, Pycrofts Road, Triplicane, Madras, against the order of the Court of Small Causes which set aside an order of eviction passed by the Rent Controller. The building in question is a non-residential one. It was leased to the respondent for doing business in betel leaves. The case for the petitioner is that by selling crackers in the premises during Deepavali season without the landlord's consent the tenant used the premises for a purpose other than that for which it was let out to him. He therefore, prayed for eviction of the tenant under Section 7(3)(ii)(b) of the Madras Act XXV of 1949 The tenant admitted that in a small portion of the premiss let out to him he did business in selling crackers during Deepavali season of 1954 and 1955- His case, however, was that the tenancy was for doing business generally and was not restricted only to the sale of betel leaves and secondly the petitioner hims...
Tag this Judgment!A. Balasubramania Naicker Vs. A. Doraiswamy Naicker and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-23-1958
Reported in: (1958)2MLJ616
ORDERSomasundaram, J.1. This is a petition against the issue of summons on the petitioner to show cause why he should not be directed to deliver possession of the temples by force. The respondents are trustees appointed by the Area Committee. It is clear from the summons that what the trustees seek to get possession of is only of the temples and not of the property belonging to the temples. This petition has been presented for quashing the proceedings on the ground that the trustees have not produced a certificate in the prescribed form stating that the property in question belongs to the religious institution. Mr. Raghavan appearing for the respondents, trustees, has raised a point of law, and that is that under Section 87 of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act a certificate by the Commissioner or the Deputy Commissioner in the prescribed form is required only when the application is for the possession of properties belonging to the temple. But if the application is only...
Tag this Judgment!S.K. Mohamed Ibrahim and ors. Vs. M. Vedachala Mudaliar (Died) and ors ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-23-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Mad387; (1958)IIMLJ442
1. This civil revision petition arises from an order of the learned Subordinate Judge of Cuddalore in O. S. No. 57 of 1952 on the file of his court directing a revised valuation of the reliefs prayed for in the plaint and also fixing the basis of value of the reliefs sought. The plaintiffs are the petitioners herein. They are 3 of the heirs of one Khader Hussain Rowther who was carrying on business in partnership under the name and style of Mask and Co., with respondents 1 and 2. Kliader Hussain died early in 1943.The petitioners stated that they were entitled to have a dissolution of the firm, viz., Mask, and Co., or for a declaration that it has been dissolved and also prayed for taking of accounts on that basis. In the plaint the plaintiffs referred to three receipts executed by them in favour of defendants 1 and 2 on a settlement of accounts upto 1943. Written statements were filed and when the matter was taken up for trial, the lower court by its order dated 2-8-1956 held that the...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »