Chennai Court July 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.
The Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. R. Ramnarayan Ghellaram
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-25-1960
Reported in: (1960)2MLJ560
Rajagopalan, J.1. The facts are not in controversy. They lie within a brief compass, and, as they have been set out in the statement of the case, we do not propose to set them out over again.2. The contention of learned Counsel for the Department, that there is no provision for reducing the total world income by the earned income relief for the purpose of Section 17(1), is well founded, and must prevail. Section 15 (a) makes it clear that the total income has to be reduced by the earned income only for the purpose of income-tax, and that the income so reduced is to be deemed to be the total income. On a reading of Section 15 (a) it should be obvious that the earned income relief does not enter into the computation of the total world income. With reference to Section 17(1), neither the computation of the total world income nor the computation of the total income of the assessee comes into play. We take the computed total world inccme and the computed total income, and the total world in...
A.R. Varma and anr. Vs. Mettur Industries Ltd. and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-21-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Mad393; [1961(2)FLR352]; (1961)ILLJ456Mad; (1961)2MLJ81
Veeraswami, J.1. This is an appeal from the order of Balakrishna Aiyar, J. in W. P. No. 110 of 1958, quashing the award dated 30-12-1957 of the Labour Court, Coimbatore, in I. D. No. 60 of 1957, by which the Labour Court had directed the first respondent management to reinstate the first appellant before us in service.2. The first appellant, who was an employee of the first respondent company as a weaving production clerk and who had put in a service of about 11 years, was dismissed by the first respondent on 28-11-1956 on the ground that he was found sleeping on three occasions while on duty on the night of 22-11-1956. As at that time an industrial dispute was pending adjudication by the Industrial Tribunal, now known as the Labour Court, at Coimbatore, the first respondent applied to that Tribunal under Section 33(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, for approval of the order of dismissal.At the same time, the first appellant also filed a complaint under Section 33-A of the Act questio...
Bell Mark Tobacco Company and ors. Vs. the Government of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-21-1960
Reported in: [1961]12STC126(Mad)
Rajagopalan, J. 1. The petitioners in all these cases were dealers in chewing tobacco which they also sold in the packets prepared by them. When they were assessed to sales tax, the turnover of these sales was included in their taxable turnover. In the relevant assessment years tobacco and tobacco products were subject to the levy of sales tax at the single points specified in clauses (vii) and (viii) of Section 5 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, IX of 1939.2. The main question that arises for consideration in all these applications to revise the orders of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal is, whether the Tribunal was right in sustaining the assessment on such sales of packets of chewing tobacco effected by the petitioners. Two other questions also arise, which we shall set out in detail later.3. T. C. Nos. 62 to 65 of 1959, and T. C. Nos. 32 to 34 of 1960 have come up for final disposal after notice to the respondent, the State. T. C. Nos. 49 to 53, 56, 67, 79 and 80 of 1960 came u...
South Arcot Co-operative Motor Transport Society Ltd. (for Ex-servicem ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Mad217; [1961(2)FLR123]; (1960)IILLJ693Mad; (1960)IILLJ693Mad; (1960)2MLJ573
ORDERRamachandra Iyer, J.1. These are petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for records in O. P. Nos. 746 to 748 of 1957 and quash the Order of the Labour Court of Madras D/- 24-9-1958. 2. The South Arcot Co-operative Motor Transport Society Ltd. (for ex-servicemen) is a society registered under the Madras Co-operative Societies Act, 1932, and is engaged in the running of lorries and motor transport services in South Arcot Dt. Syed Batcha. Appadurai and Kannan were amongst those who were employed by the petitioner in the transport services. It is stated that they were also share-holders in the society. In 1957, the society decided to close down the lorry service and confine its activities to motor transport only. As a consequence thereof, the society had to discharge some if its workmen. There is no controversy that the discharge proposed was anything but bona fide, occasioned by the abolition of a section of the petitioner's busi...
K.M.S. Lakshmana Aiyar Vs. Additional Income Tax Officer, Special Circ ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-19-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Mad146; [1960]40ITR469(Mad); (1961)1MLJ93
Ramachandra Iyer, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for records in G. I. No. 7-I/55-56 dated 28-2-1957, and to quash the order of the Additional Income-tax Officer, Special Circle, Madras, assessing the petitioner to tax under Section 34 of the Indian Income-tax Act.2. The petitioner, an assessee, was assessed to an income of Rs. 3362 for the year 1955-56 (the corresponding year of account being 13-4-1954 to 12-4-1955) on the basis of his return; no tax was levied thereon, as it was below the taxable limit. Some time thereafter, the Additional Income-tax Officer, Special Circle, Madras, obtained information which reveated that the assessee had tailed to disclose fully and truly his real income for the year. The officer initiated proceedings under Section 34 of the Act, and after enquiry, found that, during the year of account, the assessee should be held as deemed to have received by way of dividend a sum...
Dhanapal Chettiar and ors. Vs. Govindaraja Chetty and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-19-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Mad262
Jagadisan, J.1. The plaintiffs in O. S. No. 44 of 1954, on the file of the District Munsiff's Court, Triuvallur, sued to recover possession of immoveable properties described in the plaint schedules B to H. The suit properties originally belonged to one Namasivaya Chetti who died oil 17-6-1920, leaving behind his widow Ammayee Ammal. Ammayee Ammal died on 7-11-1953. The plaintiffs claim to be the reversioners entitled to succeed to the state of Namasivaya after the death of Ammayee Animal who, according to them, succeeded only to a limited estate.The relationship of the plaintiffs to the deceased Namasivaya is that they are the father's brother's grandsons of Namasivaya. The 13th defendant in the suit is also related to Namasivaya in the same manner and in the same degree. The plaintiffs claimed that they along with the 13th defendant were entitled to succeed to, the suit properties which, they alleged, belonged originally to Namasivaya and then devolved upon Ammayee Ammal as a limited...
Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd., Dalmiapuram Vs. Regional Labour Commissio ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-19-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Mad297; [1961(2)FLR428]; (1960)IILLJ697Mad; (1960)IILLJ697Mad
ORDERRamachandra Iyer, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, praying that this court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari calling for records in No. III (47) of 1958, and quash the order dated 23-8-1958 made therein by the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Madras-7. 2. The petitioner is the Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd., a company, carrying on business in the manufacture and sale of cement in Dalmiapuram; Tiruchirapalli Dt. The company maintains a factory for the manufacture of cement. There are also quarries, from which materials are obtained. The workers employed fall into two groups namely, those employed in the factory premises, and those who work in the quarries. 22 workmen, who are respondents 2 to 23 in the petition, were unskilled workers doing duties in the third quarry in Dalmiapuram. The condition of service under which they were employed, were that, if no work could be found for them on a particular day in the quarry in which they were e...
The Accountant General, Madras Vs. Singamuthu Konar and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-18-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Mad288
ORDERRamachandra Iyer, J.1. This is a case taken up by this Court suo motu to revise the order of the Subordinate Judge in E. P. No. 28 of 1957 in S. C, S. No. 199 of 1947 on the file of the Sub Court, Pudukottai. The order sought to be revised is dated 28-2-1958 which made absolute the attachment of a provident fund amount standing in the name of one V. Somasundaram. The facts relevant to the case are : One V. Somasundaram, a process server of the Sub Court, Pudukottai, was a subscriber to the Pudukottai State Provident Fund.The account showed a balance of Rs. 584-14-0. On 12-9-1935 the subscriber nominated his paternal uncle Swaminathan as the beneficiary in respect of the fund. The nominee, however, predeceased the subscriber. On 14-2-1953, Somasundaram died a bachelor leaving no family of his own. There were three claimants to the provident fund. On 26-2-1953 the Subordinate Judge directed the rival claimants to produce a succession certificate and take the amount due under the fun...
Janakamma and anr. Vs. A. Govindraj Mudaliar and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-15-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Mad196; (1961)1MLJ166
Anantanarayanan, J.1. The facts with reference to which this second appeal is sought to be filed have been set forth clearly both in the judgment of the first court, and the judgment of the learned District Judge in appeal. We are now concerned with the question which originally arose under issue 5, whether the suit was barred by the principle of constructive res judicata in view of the order on E. A. No. 114 of 1956.2. As the learned District Munsif observes, E. A. No. 114 of 1956 was a petition filed by the first plaintiff and an order was passed dismissing it on 5-3-1956. Admittedly, the first plaintiff did not come forward with a suit under Order XXI, Rule 63, C. P. Code within a year from the date of this order. The first Court relied upon the following decisions : Aisamma v. Moidin Kunhi Beari, 45 MLJ 690 : (AIR 1924 Mad 111), Nara-simha Chariar v. Raghava Padayachi : AIR1945Mad333 and Cannanore Bank Ltd. v. Madhavi, : AIR1942Mad41 , for the view that the order would be conclusiv...
Madras State Electricity Board Vs. Commissioner of Labour and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-15-1960
Reported in: (1960)IILLJ357Mad
ORDERRajagopalan, J.1. The petitioner is the Madras State Electricity Board, constituted under the Electricity (Supply) Act (54 of 1948), to which I shall hereafter refer as the Electricity Act. When the Board was constituted with effect from 1 July 1957, it took over the employees who had up to then been in the employ of the Government of Madras in the Electricity Department. Some of the employees so taken over were clerks and typists who had been appointed wholly on a temporary basis under the statutory rules applicable to Government servants. Under these rules their services were liable to be terminated without notice and had to be terminated if candidates regularly recruited in accordance with the rules were available for appointment. Even after the typists and clerks had passed into the employ of the Electricity Board, they continued to be governed by the rules applicable to civil servants in the employ of the Government under the transitory regulations promulgated by the Board un...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »