Chennai Court February 1960 Judgments
Jeyams Engineering Company Vs. Additional Commissioner for Workmen's C ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-18-1960
Reported in: (1960)IILLJ354Mad
P.V. Rajamannar, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of Rajagopalan, J., in Writ Petition No. 561 of 1956. The respondent 2, M.A. Santani, was employed as the manager of the Coimbatore branch of the appellant firm, Jeyams Engineering Company, Coimbatore, which bad its head office at Bombay. There were also branches of the firm at Madras, Nagpur, Delhi and other places. On 16 January 1955, the respondent 2 received a communication from the regional manager of the appellant firm, Southern India branches, the material portion of which was as follows:Under instructions from head office, Bombay, I am issuing the following transfer orders in connexion with transfer of charge of Coimbatore office.Mr. M.A. Santani is transferred from Coimbatore office to either Delhi office or Nagpur office. Definite orders with regard to which office he la transferred will be issued on receiving1 necessary confirmation from the head office very soon.Mr. J.N. Radhakrlshnani, manager of Kanpar office, w...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Wahib Basha
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-17-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Mad162; 1961CriLJ533
Ramaswami, J.1. This is a revision which has been preferred against the conviction and sentence of the learned 7th Presidency Magistrate in C. C. 3126 of 1959.2. On information received by the Assistant Commissioner of Police Crimes, Southern Range, Madras (P. W. 4) that the accused was dealing in ganja and opium a surprise raid of his premises was organised. The Sub-Inspector of Police, P. W. 1 was directed to keep a watch over the house of the accused at No. 1/23 Ammer Unnissa Begum Street, Suparigunta. The Asst. Commissioner of Police himself was personally supervising the raiding operation.In the course of the search of the premises occupied by the accused and his wife, P. W. 1, recovered from a room in the occupation of the accused and his wife a wooden box M. O. 13, wherein was found a packet of opium weighing 10 1/2 palams, M. O. 1, two packet? of opium weighing one gundumani, M. O. 2 series, a pawn ticket No. 3842 dated 4-10-1958 in the name of the accused, another pawn ticket,...
Tag this Judgment!T.V. Sundaram Iyengar and Sons Private Limited Vs. the Deputy Commerci ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-17-1960
Reported in: [1960]11STC443(Mad)
Ramachandra Iyer, J.1. These are petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of appropriate writs prohibiting the first respondent from enforcing payment of a portion of the sales tax collected but later refunded to the petitioners.2. The petitioners are dealers in automobiles and their parts having their business at Madurai. In respect of their turnover during the years 1948-49 and 1949-50, they were provisionally assessed to sales tax and such tax was duly paid by them. In the course of their business, the petitioners, who are registered dealers, had collected from their customers the sales tax payable on goods sold to them. In the final assessment to sales tax, the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer included in the assessable turnover collections of sales tax made by the petitioners, with the result that a sum of Rs. 4,927-2-6 in respect of the assessment year 1948-49 and a sum of Rs. 13,369-9-3 in respect of the year 1949-50, were assessed as tax on the sales tax colle...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Marudai Prisoner
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-17-1960
Reported in: 1960CriLJ1102
Anantanarayanan, J.1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Tiruchirapalli in Sessions Case No. 93 of 1959 on his file, convictins; the first accused in that case (Marudai) both of murder (Section 302 IPC) and causing disappearance of the evidence of crime (Section 201 I. P. C), and sentencing him to death upon the first charge, and to rigorous imprisonment for two years upon the second. At the outset itself, it is important to note that the prosecution related to the murder of one Sellayee, the wife of this accused I, aged at about 18 when she was killed, and to the disposal of her body. Further, that accused 2 in the case, who was tried upon the charge Under Section 201 IPC alone but acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge, was the Village Munsif of Irunagalur (Lalgudi Taluk), apparently a man of some influence and some local status. The appeal of the condemned prisoner is also before us.2. The case rests entirely upon circumstantial evidence, and those pieces of evide...
Tag this Judgment!A.B. Palani Vs. K.P. Ramaswami Mudaliar and Co., by K.P. Kolandiappa M ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-17-1960
Reported in: (1960)2MLJ361
Rajamannar, C.J.1. These two appeals arise out of a petition filed by one K.P. Ramaswami Mudaliar & Co., the contesting respondent before us, to adjudicate Venkataramanjulu Chetty insolvent. The petition was filed on 27th March, 1958. To that petition, as the rules stood at the time, only the debtor was made a party. It was alleged that the debtor had sold away his only available property, No. 40, Rottikara Thiruvengada Mudali Street, Choolai, for Rs. 25,000 on 7th March, 1958 and that the alienation was fraudulent and intended to defeat and. delay creditors including the petitioning creditor. On 30th June, 1958, an application was taken out by the petitioning creditor for the addition of the alienee under the sale-deed as a party respondent and for setting aside the sale in his favour. Notice went on this application to the alienee Palani Mudaliar who raised the objection that he was not liable to be added as respondent because three months had elapsed since the date of the alienation...
Tag this Judgment!C.V. Venkataraman and anr. Vs. C.S. Lakshmi Ammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-16-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Mad32; (1960)2MLJ157
1. This appeal,must be allowed not on the merits but on the ground that the learned Judge had no jurisdiction to grant a declaration such as that which he granted to the respondent on an application purporting to be under Section 151 C.P.C. practically varying the consent decree in a suit, C. S. No. 108 of 1938. That decree has become final and it is not the case of the respondent that he-cause of the passing of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 that decree has become void. All that she says is that by reason of the provisions of that Act she has become entitled absolutely to the property in which she had under the consent decree only an estate for life. The question no doubt depends upon the construction of Section 14(2) of the Act.But so far as we are aware, there is no provision in the Code of Civil Procedure or anywhere else which warrants an application as that on which the judgment under appeal was passed. The application was for the grant of a declaration that the respondent's righ...
Tag this Judgment!Janab A. Syed Jalal Sahib (Deceased) by Legal Representative Syed Usma ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-16-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Mad21; [1960]39ITR660(Mad); (1961)1MLJ107
1. The main line of business of the assessee, Syed Jalal Sahib, since deceased, was tile manufacture and sale of beedis. He interested himself in horse lacing, and he attended races at a number of centres in South India quite regularly for a number of years. Apparently at first he contented himself with betting on the horses in those races. Subsequently he acquired horses of his own which he entered for some of the races. Some of these horses he owned in partnership with others. When exactly the assessee started entering his horses for races is not clear. The racing horses of course were left in charge of the trainers.The assessee maintained a separate set of accounts, referred to by the Income-tax Officer as the Race Book, in which apparently the assessee showed the details of the monies expended by him and the monies realised by him, either from the stakes for which his horses ran or from his successful bets. In the year of account which ended on 31-3-1947 which corresponded to the a...
Tag this Judgment!C.D. Sarojini Ammal Vs. the Egmore Benefit Society 3rd Branch Ltd. by ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-16-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Mad75; (1961)1MLJ207
Anantanarayanan, J.1. This is an appeal by the petitioner in the court below in an application under Order XXI, Rule 90 C. P. Code, to set aside the sale on account of certain material irregularities, and alleged fraud. The learned Second Assistant Judge of the City Civil Court, Madras, dismissed the application because the petitioner (appellant) defaulted to furnish security as demanded by the court under the first proviso to Order XXI, rule 90 C. P. C. The facts are practically admitted, and the appeal merely involves a simple question of the application of certain relevant legal principles to facts of this character.2. What happened in the court below was this. The petitioner (appellant) had not furnished security, and the matter was before the court on 31-10-1957. On the adjourned date, there was a definite order made calling upon the appellant to furnish security in a sum of Rs. 5,000, and the proceedings were again adjourned to 16-11-1957. On that date, security was not furnished...
Tag this Judgment!Lakshmi Ammal and ors. Vs. Ramachandra Reddiar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-16-1960
Reported in: AIR1960Mad568; (1960)2MLJ264
(1) This is an appeal against the judgment of Krishnaswami Nayudu J. reversing the judgment and decree of the district Judge, Ramanathapuram, in A. S. No. 208 of 1953, which confirmed the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge of Ramanathapuram at Madurai, in O. S. No. 32 of 1952.(2) One Kandaswami Reddiar and Narayana Reddiar were tow brothers who became divided, a division of the family properties having been effected by metes and bounds in 1947. Kandaswami Reddiar died leaving behind his son Ramachandra Reddiar. Narayana Reddiar had to sons Subbiah and Thiruvengadam and one daughter, Lakahmi Ammal. Subbiah died a bachelor in 1948. Thiruvengadam died on 24-10-1949 leaving behind his widow Alamelu and a daughter Seethammal. Narayana Reddiar had a sister, also named Lakshmi Ammal.After the death of Subbiah and Tiruvengadam, Narayana Reddiar who survived his sons became ill disposed towards his daughter-in-law Alamelu and his grand daughter Seethammal. It is stated that two or th...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: K.R.P.L. Chockalingam Chettiar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-15-1960
Reported in: 1960CriLJ1625
Ramaswami, J. 1. On a reference made by our 'learned brother Somasundaram, J. whether Ch. III of the Indian Extradition Act, 1903 continues to be applicable to this case of extradition from India to Ceylon, this Full Bench has been constituted by the learned Chief Justice. 2. The" facts leading to this reference are ; The petitioner Chockalingam Chettiar, a native of Kandavarayanpettai village, Tirupattur taluk in Ramanathapuram District was employed as an agent of "Chetty" by the Gonakelle, El Teb and Demmeria Estates. The practice is for the Superintendents of these Estates to draw cheques in favour of this Chockalingam Chettiar on the Imperial Bank of India and the Mercantile Bank of India at Colombo and Chockalingam Chettiai would cash those cheques and disburse the amounts to the labourers employed in the said estates who apparently are mostly Tamilians. Three such cheques were issued by the respective Superintendents of these three Estates Messrs. Dealker, Percy and Horn for a to...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »