Chennai Court January 1960 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.
C. Mohideen Kutty Vs. A.S. Shaik Mohamed Maricar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-25-1960
Reported in: (1960)2MLJ68
1. This Civil Revision Petition arises out of proceedings between the landlord and tenant, initiated by the landlord to evict the tenant, for default in the payment of rent.2. An application, H.R.C. No. 4832 of 1958, before the House Rent Controller Madras, was filed by the landlord, for evicting the tenant, alleging default in the payment of rent from July, 1958 to November, 1958. Under the provisions of Section 7-A of the Rent Control Act (Act XXV of 1949) arrears of rent have to be deposited before the tenant can contest the application. It appears that on 16th January 1959, the Rent Controller passed an order granting time for further payment the tenant having on that date, issued a cheque in favour of the landlord for Rs. 1,100 on the Nedungadi Bank. On 26th February, 1959, the date to which 'the proceedings were adjourned, the following order was passed:Respondent called twice, absent. Cheque was dishonoured. Arrears not paid as undertaken. Further proceedings stopped under Secti...
Express Newspapers Ltd. 'Club House' Mount Road, Madras vs. State of M ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-21-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Mad59; (1960)1MLJ90
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Chief Judge of the Court of Small Causes, Madras, in L. C. No. 22 of 1954, which was a claim by Express Newspapers Ltd,, against the Government represented by the Collector ol Madras under Section 48(2) of the Land Acquisition Act. The claim was rejected by the Court below except for an amount of Rs. 4871-4-0 allowed as compensation payable for actual costs incurred by the claimant in connection with the acquisition. In view of the importance of the subject matter, and as the research of learned counsel for the appellant (Sri K. V. Venkatasubramania Iyer) and the learned Government Pleader has failed to bring to our attention any authorities directly bearing upon Section 48(2), or the principles with reference to which compensation should be assessed under that section, we propose to deal with the facts and the law at some length.2. The broad facts are that the land or site bearing R. S. Nos. 315/2 and 315/3, measuring abou...
Buckingham and Carnatic Co. Ltd., Madras Vs. Buckingham and Carnatic M ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-21-1960
Reported in: AIR1960Mad509
Rajamannar, C.J.(1) This is an application for review of the order passed by this Court on 13th November 1959 in S. C. P. No. 160 of 1959 granting leave to the petitioners to appeal to the Supreme Court from the decision of this Court in Writ App. Nos. 49 and 50 of 1959.* The prayer is to omit the direction contained in the order that the petitioners should pay in any event the costs of the respondents in the Supreme Court appeal. The ground on which the review is sought is that our direction is neither in accordance with law nor within the jurisdiction of this Court to make. The contention is that this Court has no jurisdiction to make an order relating to the costs of appeal in the Supreme Court, which is a matter entirely within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.(2) When the petitioners' application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court came on or hearing before us, while we considered that the case involved a question of considerable importance, particularly from the point o...
Nadar Bank Ltd., Madurai Vs. Canara Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-21-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Mad326; [1961]31CompCas12(Mad); (1960)IIMLJ489
Anantanarayanan, J.1. This appeal is instituted by the third defendant in the court below, The Nadar Bank Limited, Madurai, against the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Madurai in O. S. No. 155 of 1952, which was a suit instituted by the Canara Bank Ltd. (plaintiff) for recovery of a sum of Rs. 21017-6-0, from two merchants, first and second defendants, which was decreed with costs. As the appeal involves certain interesting questions of law and fact relating to the priority of what are known in mercantile and banking practice as loans upon the security of goods under the 'open credit' system, as against similar advances under the 'key loans' system, we shall first set forth the broad and indisputable facts, before formulating the points that arise for our determination.2. The facts are that defendants 1 and 2 are members of an undivided Hindu family canying on business in grains and cereals under the name and style of 'V. M. Sankarapandia Nadar' at Madurai. The ...
Thangavelu (M.) Vs. Tiruchirappalli City Co-operative Bank, Ltd. and a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-21-1960
Reported in: (1960)IILLJ209Mad
ORDERP.V. Rajamannar, C.J.1. This appeal against the judgment of Rajagopalan, J., in W.P. No. 165 of 1956 must be allowed, though on a ground which was not placed before the learned Judge as learned Counsel apparently overlooked a very material fact, to which we shall advert later on in this judgment, but which concludes the matter.2. The appellant was a clerk in the employment of the first respondent, the Tiruchirappalli City Co-operative Bank, Ltd., in Puthur, Tiruchirappalli, from about 1942, He was discharged from service on 14 May 1955. He thereupon preferred an appeal under Section 41 of the Madras Shops and Establishments Act (Act 36 of 1947) to the prescribed authority who was the Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation. At the hearing before the said tribunal, the bank raised a preliminary objection that the provisions of the Act did not apply to the bank, because the bank had been exempted from all the provisions of the At by a notification issued by the Government...
Abdur Rahim Vs. State of Madras (Secretary, Industries, Labour and Co- ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-21-1960
Reported in: (1961)IILLJ213Mad
ORDERRamachandra Ayyar, J.1. These twenty-eight petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, and raise the questions as to the constitutional validity of the Madras Beedi Industrial Premises (Regulation of Conditions of Work) Act, 1958 (Act XXXII of 1958; which hereafter shall be referred to as the Act.2. The Act was passed by the Madras State legislature to regulate the conditions of work, in beedi industrial premises in the State of Madras, so as to enable the enforcement of labour and welfare laws. The Act authorizes the making of rules to carry out the purposes of the legislation. In exercise of such powers, the Government have made rules. The Act received the assent of the President on 3 December 1958 It extends to the whole of the Madras State, and is to come into force on such date as may, by notification, be appointed by the Government which is authorized in its discretion to fix different dates for different areas and for the coming into force of the whole or dif...
Alamelu Ammal Vs. Thayarammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-20-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Mad355
ORDERJagadisan, J.1. This civil revision petition is directed against the order of the learned District Munsif, Tiruvayami, directing the defendant in the suit to pay court fee upon the value of the improvements which he had claimed in the written stafement in a suit tor redemption.2. In paragraphs 10 and 14 of the written statement, the defendant contends that the plaintiff should not be allowed to redeem the othi in any event without paying the cosh of the improvements effected by the defendant. A sepecific issue has also been framed, issue 3, whether the defendant is entitled to the costs of improvements, if any, effected by him? Section 8 of the Court-fees Act, 1955 provides that a written statement pleading a set oft on a counter claim shall be chargeable with court-fee in the same manner as a plaint.The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the defendant in the suit, is that the claim of the defendant in the written statement is neither a set off nor a c...
G.J. Coelho Vs. the State of Madras Represented by the Agricultural In ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-19-1960
Reported in: (1960)2MLJ178
Rajagopalan, J.1. Under the provisions of the Madras Agricultural Income-tax Act (V of 1955) the petitioner was assessed to tax in the assessment year 1955-56 on his agricultural income from his plantation known as the Silver Cloud Estate, in the 'previous year' ending with 30th June, 1954. The petitioner purchased that estate in 1950 for Rs. 3,10,000, to pay which he had to borrow Rs. 2,90,000 from two sets of creditors. In the year of account the petitioner paid those creditors a sum of Rs. 22,628-9-8 as interest on those loans, and he claimed that the whole of that payment should be deducted before his assessable income was computed. The Department held that the petitioner was entitled only to the relief for which Section 5 (k) of Act V of 1955 provided and deducted a sum of Rs. 1,570-10-7. The petitioner appealed to the Tribunal. The Tribunal rejected his contention, that he was entitled to have the whole amount deducted under Section 5 (e) of the Act. It was the correctness of tha...
P.K. Muthuvelappa Goundar Vs. the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Soc ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-19-1960
Reported in: (1960)2MLJ392
ORDERJagadisan, J.1. This writ petition prays for the issue of a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, direction or order for quashing the order of the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Coimbatore, dated ist December, 1959, in A.R.C. No. 140 of 1959 under the following circumstances:2. The Coimbatore District Co-operative Central Bank, Ltd., is a registered Society governed by the Madras Co-operative Societies Act (VI of 1932). It will be hereinafter referred to as the Central Bank. The General Body of Central Bank consists of the following members : (I) individual members; (ii) affiliated societies; (iii) the State Co-operative Bank, Ltd., and (iv) the State Government if they held shares in the Bank. Bye-law No. 8 of the Central Bank provides that each society being a member of the Central Bank shall at a general meeting appoint a delegate who shall hold office for a period of three years or until his successor shall have been appointed in accordance with the rules ...
G. J. Coelho Vs. State of Madras.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-19-1960
Reported in: [1960]40ITR686(Mad)
RAJAGOPALAN, J. - Under the provisions of the Madras Agricultural Income-tax Act (V of 1955) the petitioner was assessed to tax in the assessment year 1955-56 on his agricultural income from his plantation known as the Silver Cloud Estate, in the 'previous year' ending with June 30, 1954. The petitioner purchased that estate in 1950 for Rs. 3,10,000 to pay which he had to borrow Rs. 2,90,000 from two sets of creditors. In the year of account the petitioner paid those creditors a sum of Rs. 22,628-9-8 as interest on these loans and he claimed that the whole of that payment should be deducted before his assessable income was computed. The Department held that the petitioner was entitled only to the relief for which section 5(k) of Act V of 1955 provided and deducted a sum of Rs. 1,570-10-7. The petitioner appealed to the Tribunal. The Tribunal rejected his contention that he was entitled to have the whole amount deducted under section 5(e) of the Act. It was the correctness of that decis...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »