Chennai Court May 1961 Judgments
Kannan Lorry Service, Pollachi Vs. Nataraja Motor Service, Pollachi an ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-05-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Mad198; (1962)1MLJ111
Ramakrishnan, J.(1) These two petitions are filed for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the State Transport Appellate tribunal in App. No. 211 of 1960. The prior facts necessary for a consideration of these two petitions are briefly the following.On 12-9-1959 the Regional Transport Authority, Coimbatore, issued a notification under S. 57(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act in the following terms:'The Secretary, Region al Transport Authority Coimbatore, will receive applications in form S.P.C.A. upto 30-9-1959 for the grant of pucca stage carriage permit for two buses...... to ply on the route 'Pollachi to Sungam' upto State limit via Anmalai Sethumadai anhd top slip (Mt. Stuart)....... Applications received after the date specified above, viz.,, 30-9-1959 will not be considered'.There were a number of applications but we are concerned now with the application of Nataraja Motor Service Market Road, Pollachi (respondent 1 in W. P. No 1295 of 1960 and respondent 2 in W.P.No...
Tag this Judgment!Lakshmipathi (Dr. T.N.) Vs. Standard Vacuum Oil Company, Ltd. (by Its ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-05-1961
Reported in: (1961)IILLJ767Mad
ORDERRamakrishnan, J.1. The petitioner in this Writ Petition, Dr. T.N. Lakshmipathi was engaged by respondent 1, the Standard Vacuum Oil Company, Madras, in 1944, and in 1946, he entered into an agreement regarding his conditions of service with respondent 1. One of the conditions of this agreement was that the service would be terminable at the instance of either party by two months' notice. Belying on this clause, respondent 1 company terminated the petitioner's service on 19 August 1958, to be effective from 1 September 1958. Urging that he was a person employed within the definition in Section 2(12) of the Madras Shops and Establishments Act of 1947, the petitioner sought for relief under Section 41 of the above Act from respondent 2, the Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Board of Revenue, Chepauk, Madras. The respondent 2, after considering the evidence before him adduced by the petitioner, as well as respondent 1 company, came to the conclusion that the petition...
Tag this Judgment!Malli Selva Iyer Vs. the Madurai Mercantile Bank, Ltd. (In Liquidation ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-05-1961
Reported in: (1962)1MLJ251
Ramachandra Iyer, J.1. These revision petitions arise from the orders of the Subordinate Judge of Madurai in E.A. Nos. 890 and 915 of 1956 rejecting two petitions filed under Order 21, Rule 58 of the Civil Procedure Code to raise the attachment before judgment effected on the property in the suit and in the petitions. In O.S. No. 76 of 1949 on the file of the Sub-Court, Madurai. The Madurai Mercantile Bank, Ltd., obtained a decree for a large sum of money against one Rajagopala Iyer. Immediately after the filing of the suit the bank obtained an order for attachment before judgment of certain properties belonging to the debtor. Subsequently the bank was faced with financial difficulties. In O.P. No. 126 of 1953 the bank was directed to be wound-up, by an order of this Court, dated 22nd July, 1953.2. The Official Liquidator who thereafter took charge of the assets of the bank filed E.P. No. 71 of 1956 in Sub-Court, Madurai, for execution of the decree in O.S. No. 76 of 1949. The petition...
Tag this Judgment!Gnanaprakasan and anr. Vs. Mahboob Bi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-05-1961
Reported in: (1962)1MLJ254
Srinivasan, J.1. These Revision Petitions arise out of proceedings under the Madras City Tenants' Protection Act under the following circumstances. In suits in ejectment filed by the landlord, the tenants applied under Section 9 of the above Act, and prayed for an order of Court to direct the landlord to sell the land for a price to be fixed by the Court. The Court accordingly appointed a Commissioner, who has valued the land and directed the payment of the price in instalments. Under the Act as it stood at the relevant time, there was no provision for an appeal against an order of the Court fixing the price. The landlord-respondent thereupon filed these Revision Petitions principally questioning the valuation fixed by the Court. While these Revision Petitions were pending before this Court, the Madras City Tenants' Protection Act was amended by Act (XIII of 1960), whereby certain important amendments were carried out in certain Sections of the Act. Section 9-A was introduced providing...
Tag this Judgment!Natesa Chetty Vs. V.M. Subba Raya Chetty
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-03-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Mad389
(1) This revision arises out of a suit for arrears of rent. In the suit, rent was claimed from 1-9-1952 to 20-2-1956. A sum of Rs. 75 claimed to have been spent by the defendant for repairs was admitted by the plaintiff who gave credit for this amount. A sum of Rs. 266-14-0 remitted by money order by the defendant on 20-2-1956 was also given credit to. The defence was that the period of tenancy commenced from 9-2-1953 and further that the rate of rent was only Rs. 12. The defendant also contended that he had completely discharged all arrears of rent due. Another sum of Rs. 12 and odd which he alleged he spent for repairs was also claimed.(2) The suit was originally decreed. There was a revision petition and this court held that in so far as the tenancy was concerned, the period was between February 1953 and February 1956, and that the rate of rent was Rs. 15 per month. The findings of the trial court in this regard were accepted by this court. But the decree was nevertheless set aside ...
Tag this Judgment!Palani Pillai Vs. Sengamalathachi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-03-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Mad160
(1) This second appeal raises the question whether a Hindu minor is bound by a deed of family arrangement entered into on his behalf by his natural guardian in bona fide settlement of claims against the minor's estate and for his benefit.(2) One Arunachalam Pillai married two wives, Ammalammal and Sengamalathachi. By his first wife, Ammalammal, he had no issues. He had a daughter named Dhanalakshmi and a son named Palani by his second wife Sengamalam. One Rathnaswami Pillai was the son of his first wife's younger brother. Arunachalam Pillai desired that his daughter. Dhanalakshmi should be given in marriage to Rathnaswami Pillai. He executed a settlement deed on 17-2-1936 in and by which he settled the A schedule properties attached to that deed absolutely in favour of Dhanalakshmi and Rathnaswami Pillai. Items 1 and 2 of the B schedule properties attached to that settlement deed were to be enjoyed by Arunachalam Pillai himself during his lifetime and after him they were to be taken ab...
Tag this Judgment!C. Lakshmiah Reddiar Vs. the Sri Perumbadur Taluk Co-operative Marketi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-03-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Mad169
Rajamannar, C.J.(1) This is an appeal from the judgment of Ramakrishnan, J., dismissing a petition (W. P. No. 379 of 1961) filed under Article 226 of the Constitution by the appellant C. Lakshmiah Reddiar for the issue of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ to quash the proceedings of the Board of Directors of the Sriperumbudur Taluk Co-operative Marketing Society dated 19-3-1961 in so far as they relate to the rejection of the nomination paper of the appellant in connection with the election of the directors of the Society. The appellant's nomination was rejected on the ground that he had not brought to the society a quantity of 50 maunds of paddy for sale through the Society. The main ground on which the appellant impugned the order of the Board of Directors was that the entire proceedings relating to the scrutiny of nomination papers were vitiated by gross violation of all principles of natural justice inasmuch as the directors who had offered themselves for re-electi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›