Chennai Court September 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.
Sundarambal Vs. Suppiah Pillai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-09-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Mad323; (1961)1MLJ237
Veeraswami, J.1. The appellant a Hindu unmarried girl, sued her father for past maintenance from 20-12-1948 to 20-9-1958 (sic) and future maintenance from the date of the suit. Pending the suit she got employed on 1-6-1956, became a convert to Christianity and married a Christian husband on 7-7-1957. The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, came into force in the meantime on 21-12-1956. The trial Court granted a decree for past maintenance as prayed for but restricted future maintenance upto 23-1-1957 on the erroneous assumption that the said Act came into force on that date. The rate at which maintenance xvas decreed is not material for purposes of this second appeal.The father having appealed against the decree, the lower appellate court allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit on the view that by reason of the first plaintiff's conversion to Christianity she could no longer claim maintenance under the said Act and the Act itself had, to the extent to which it made provision, ...
The Vasudeva Pillai Trust, Represented by Its Secretary Mr. T.R. Ramak ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-08-1960
Reported in: (1962)1MLJ116
Jagadisan, J.1. The vacant site bearing door No. 45, Sundaram Pillai Street, Purasawalkam, Madras, belongs to an institution called the Vasudeva Pillal Trust, Madras. The Trust let out the property on lease to one Shiyala Chetti on a monthly rent of Re. 1. The Trust wanted to recover possession of the property and filed Ejectment M.P. No. 2369 of 1951 against the lessee, Shiyala Chetti in the Court of Small Causes, Madras, for eviction. On 23rd January, 1952, the Court ordered Shiyala Chetti to vacate the land on or before 31st July, 1952. Shiyala Chetti's daughter, Neelavathi Ammal thereupon filed O.S. No. 271 of 1952 on the file of the City Civil Court, Madras, against the Trust for a declaration that the ejectment order, dated 23rd January, 1952 against her father was null and void, and for an injunction restraining the Trust from executing the said order. Her case was that her mother Muthammal was the tenant of the property and that she had put up some superstructure on the land an...
G. R. Ramachari and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-08-1960
Reported in: [1961]41ITR142(Mad)
SRINIVASAN, J. - The assessee was a partnership concern consisting of two partners, Ramachari and Anantaram. It manufactured and sold textiles known as Bombay dhavanis. Its central office was at Madurai, and it had its branches at Bombay and Nagpur. In the course of the account year from April 13, 1944, to April 12, 1945, disputes arose between the partners which led to the dissolution of the partnership. It resulted in the accounts being taken in respect of the Madurai shop from April 13, 1944, to July 7, 1944, and the accounts of the Bombay and Nagpur shops up to September 11, 1944. It would also appear that Ramachari took over the entire stock. In the suit between the two parties in this connection, it was decided by the High Court that in order to settle the claims inter se the parties, the stock as on the final dates of accounting should be valued at the market price.The original assessment for the assessment year 1945-46 had been completed on March 20, 1950. This was set aside on...
Kulasekaraperumal Vs. Pathakutty Thalevanar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-07-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Mad405
1. Pethakutty Thalavanar, Pooliappa Thalavanar and Subbiah Thalavanar were three brothers who constituted a Hindu undivided family owning a few items of properties. On 27-1-1118 M. E. Subbiah Thalavanar, one of the brothers executed a deed of settlement in favour of his wife, Velammal, covering some items of joint family properties. The terms of the settlement deed will be referred to later. On 20-9-1119 M. E. Subbiah Thalavanar sold his undivided one third share in respect of 3 items of properties in favour of Pandia Thalavanar for a sum of Rs. 1100. One of the items of properties comprised in the said sale was already the subject matter of the settlement by Subbiah in favour of his wife. Pandia Thalavanar died in 1126 M. E. leaving behind his last will and testament in and by which the plaintiff, his son became the sole legatee of his properties.2. Pandia Thalavanar's son filed O. S. No. 89 of 1952 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Shencottah, impleading the two brothers of S...
Muthu Gounder Vs. Perumayammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-05-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Mad347; (1960)2MLJ568
1. These appeals involve the decision of a common and only question, viz, whether the document on which the respective suits are laid is inadmissible by reason of the provisions of Section 35 of the Stamp Act. The trial Court gave the answer in the affirmative and dismissed the suits while the appellate Court Came to the opposite conclusion and decreed them.2. The operative terms of the documents in the two appeals are identical and they ate to the following effect:-"The on demand executed on 21-2-1950 by ...... I promise to pay you or your order after a period of two years on demand by you the principal together with interest the sum of Rs. ......."The documents are stamped with four anna revenue stamps. It is not disputed that if the documents were held to be promissory notes within the definition contained in Section 2, Sub-clause (22) of the Stamp Act, they must be held to be insufficiently stamped; they being payable otherwise On demand, the proper duty would be governed by Articl...
Lakshmi Industries (Private) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-05-1960
Reported in: [1961]41ITR645(Mad)
SRINIVASAN, J. - The question that has been referred to us by the Tribunal is : 'Whether the assessee is entitled to the allowance of the claim to set off the carried forward loss of Rs. 2,15,724 against the income of the relevant accounting year under the provisions of section 24 (2) of the Indian Income-tax Act.'The question arises in this manner. The assessee which is a private limited company owns an oil and rice mill. The assessment year is 1956-57, for which a return of income of Rs. 36,318 was made. It was stated in an explanatory note accompanying the return that during the account year relating to the assessment year this entire mill had been leased out at Rs. 3,000 a month to one Veerappa Chettiar. There had been no manufacturing operations during the year and only the opening stock of oil and cake as on March 31, 1955, had been disposed of during the year. It would appear that as a result of the working in the preceding years a total loss of Rs. 2,15,724 had been incurred wh...
P. S. N. M. K. Ramalingam Chettiar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Mad ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-01-1960
Reported in: [1962]45ITR387(Mad)
SRINIVASAN J. - The question that is raised in this reference is the extent to which loss arising from speculative transactions can be set off. The assessee who is a regular dealer in zinc and metal ingots returned an income of Rs. 7,796 for the assessment year 1953-54 after setting off a loss of Rs. 23,162 in two transactions with one Muralidhar Bhagwandas of Bombay. It is not disputed by the assessee that these were speculative transactions, that is to say, that they were forward transactions in zinc and tin ingots which did not involve and which was definitely not even intended to involve any delivery of the goods. The transactions were settled by mere payment of differences. On this point there is no dispute, and the Income-tax Officer definitely found on the basis of the correspondence that was placed before him that these transactions were of a speculative kind. The officer held that the loss in such speculative transactions could be set off only against profits in similar specul...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›