Chennai Court September 1961 Judgments
Ratilal U. Shah Vs. G. Subramania Pillai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-29-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Mad249; (1962)1MLJ83
(1) This petition arises out of the order of the Additional District Munsif, Tirunelveli, declining to return the plaint as prayed for by the plaintiff. The Plaintiff is the holder of a promissory note, dated 17-12-1952. He had an option of filing the suit at Bombay or at Tirunelveli. On 2-12-1955, he filed a suit under the promissory note in the City Civil Court at Bombay. That court took the view that it had no jurisdiction and returned the plaint for presentation to the proper court. The petitioner contested the correctness of the order returning the plaint by appeal to the High Court at Bombay. In the meantime, he also took a return of the plaint and presented the same to the District Munsif, Court, at Tirunelveli, which duly registered the same as a suit. As stated earlier. The Tirunelveli court admittedly had jurisdiction to entertain the plaint. On 3-8-1959 the Bombay High Court set aside the order of the City Civil Court returning the plaint, holding that the Bombay Court had ...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India Vs. T.L. Dakshinamurthy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-29-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Mad376; [1962(4)FLR110]; (1962)IILLJ96Mad; (1962)1MLJ373
(1) The respondent in this appeal was employed as a clerk in the southern railway. During the year 1950, he was required to do the duties of a store van clerk in a goods train. A store van clerk is usually put in charge of about le wagons of a train. The respondent was, as a part of his duties, to collect empty gunny bags from the stations, and deliver them at the destination. On 6-4-1950, the respondent unloaded about 300 gunny bags at a way side station, according to him. under a mistaken impression that they were in excess of the quantity which should be taken by him to the destination. A charge was framed against him on 64-1950 by the District Controller of Stores, Perambur, of having attempted to sell 300 empty gunny bags out of those collected by him from the various stations while on duty, and he was called upon to show cause why he should not be removed from service or otherwise dealt with. On 8-5-1950, he was placed under suspension. On 16-5-1950, he submitted an explanation,...
Tag this Judgment!C.S. Nagaraja Iyer and anr. Vs. Seethalakshmi Ammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-29-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Mad369; (1962)1MLJ25
(1) One Lakshmi Ammal, who was absolutely entitled to the property which is the subject matter of the appeal being childless, brought up her brother's daughter Sivakami Ammal. The respondent to this appeal, Sitalakshmi Ammal, is Sivakami's mother. On 15-4-1929, Lakshmi Ammal executed a deed of settlement in favour of Sivakami, the material portion of which is as follows."You shall enjoy the said property without the right of any alienation till your lifetime and after your lifetime the male children that may be born to you or in their absence the female sue horn to you shall fake she same and enjoy with absolute rights. In case you have no sue whatever, your mother Seethalakshmi Ammal, and her heirs shall take the undermentioned property with absolute rights and enjoy the same."Subsequently, Sivakami was married to, the first appellant. There was no child horn of the union and on 24-2-1957, Sivakami died. The respondent the mother of Sivakami filed a suit to recover possession of the ...
Tag this Judgment!The Film Distributors Employees Association Vs. the Management of Metr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-28-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Mad226; [1962(4)FLR346]; (1962)IILLJ99Mad
1. The Metro-Goldwyn Mayer India Limited, an Indian Subsidiary firm of the American Company, has its Head Office at Bombay with a Branch at Madras. The business of the Indian concern consists in the import of films produced outside India and distributing them to customers inside the country. The commission charged by the Company on the income realised by exhibitors constitutes its principal income. The Madras Branch employed seventeen persons, mainly as clerical personnel, in the eight Sections of its office. With effect from 20th September, 1957, eight of the employees were given notice of retrenchment, the grounds being the extraordinary state of affairs resulting from a sharp increase in Customs Duty of films, drastic import restrictions, and loss experienced in consequence. Seven of these retrenched persons, with the exception of one Miss. Jayalakshmi, represented their grievances to the Secretary of the Film Distributors Employees' Association, which, in turn led to an Industrial ...
Tag this Judgment!S.B. Periasami Nadar and Company Vs. the State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-28-1961
Reported in: [1962]13STC328(Mad)
ORDERJagadisan, J.1. The petitioner is a firm of merchants trading in salt and gunnies at Anna Pillai Street, Madras. For the assessment year 1953-54 they obtained a licence under Section 8 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act. They submitted their return for the licence turnover of their business in the appropriate statutory form, Form VI. The Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Peddunaickenpet, checked their accounts and found that the transactions entered in their accounts were covered by the licence granted under Section 8 and were exempt from tax. They used their own gunnies for packing the goods sent to their principals, the dealers on whose behalf they acted as agents, and the value of the gunnies so used for packing the goods and supplied to the principals was Rs. 2,515-9-0. Their total sales turnover for the year was therefore fixed in the sum of Rs. 2,515-9-0 by the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer. In consequence of this order of assessment they were not liable to pay any tax a...
Tag this Judgment!The Film Distributors Employees Association by Its Secretary Vs. the M ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-28-1961
Reported in: (1962)1MLJ240
Anantanarayanan, J.1. The Metro-Goldwyn Mayer India Limited, an Indian Subsidiary firm of the American Company, has its Head Office at Bombay with a Branch at Madras. The business of the Indian concern consists in the import of films produced outside India and distributing them to customers inside the country. The commission charged by the Company on the income realised by exhibitors constitutes its principal income. The Madras Branch employed seventeen persons, mainly as clerical personnel, in the eight Sections of its office. With effect from 20th September, 1957, eight of the employees were given notice of retrenchment, the grounds being the extraordinary state of affairs resulting from a sharp increase in Customs Duty of films, drastic import restrictions, and loss experienced in consequence. Seven of these retrenched persons, with the exception of one Miss. Jayalakshmi, represented their grievances to the Secretary of the Film Distributors Employees' Association, which, in turn le...
Tag this Judgment!S.B. Periasami Nadar and Co., by P. Shanmughanathan, Partner Vs. the S ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-28-1961
Reported in: (1962)2MLJ152
ORDERJagadisan, J.1. The petitioner is a firm of merchants trading in salt and gunnies at Anna Pillai Street, Madras. For the assessment year 1953-1954 they obtained a licence under Section 8 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act. They submitted their returns for the licence turnover of their business in the appropriate statutory form Form VI. The Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Peddunaickenpet, checked their accounts and found that the transactions entered in their accounts were covered by the licence granted under Section 8 and were exempt from tax. They used their own gunnies for packing the goods sent to their principals, the dealers on whose behalf they acted as agents and the value of the gunnies so used for packing the goods and supplied to the principals was Rs. 2,515-9-0. Their total sales turnover for the year was therefore fixed in the sum of Rs. 2,515-9-0 by the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer. In consequence of this order of assessment they were not liable to pay any tax ...
Tag this Judgment!M. Natesan Vs. State of Madras and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-27-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Mad216
ORDER(1) This is rather an unusual case in the sense that rarely such an offence is brought before the criminal courts. P.W. 1 was a school boy, aged about 15 years, studying in the III form in the Board High School, Tiruchengode. The petitioner who happened to be a teacher was in charge of the class in which P.W. 1 was studying. The evidence shows that, on 4-2-1960, the petitioner asked P.W. 1 to show the quarterly progress report relating to him to his parent, and, in token of having shown it, to get the signature of his father. The boy returned not with the signature of his father but with a thumb impression on the progress report which, he represented, was that of his mother.Both the courts below have now found that this was an untruth, as the thumb impression which the progress report bore was that of someone else and not that of P.W. 1's mother. Evidently, suspecting that the thumb impression was not genuine, the petitioner got excited and beat P.W. 1 on the right palm with a sti...
Tag this Judgment!M.M. Mohideed Thumby and Co., Madras Vs. State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-22-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Mad323; [1962]13STC805(Mad)
Srinivasan, J.(1) The assessee petitioner is a dealer in hides and skins. Befe the Sales-tax Trbunal, the claim was by the assesseethat aturnover of Rs. 4,45.125/- and odd represented export sale to foreign buyer through the medium of local agents of the foreign buyers. This contention was examined and rejected except for asmall turnover of Rs. 22,768/- After examining the several transsactions which went to make this turnover, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that in none of these cases, could it be stated that there was any transaction which involved a foreign buyer; but that on the other hand the sales were all affected to local exporting houses, the transfer of the property being completed within the state and the transaction of the export in consequence becomming wholly disassociated with the precedent sale transaction. In this revision the correctness of this conclusion of Appelate Tribunal is canvassed.(2) Mr. T. T. Srinivasan, for the assessee, confines the prsent revision p...
Tag this Judgment!A.V. Pachiappa Chettiar and Brothers Vs. the State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-22-1961
Reported in: [1962]13STC202(Mad)
Srinivasan, J.1. In these cases a common question arises. It is whether the goods sold by the assessee, which is described as tundu tobacco, is 'chewing tobacco' produced as a result of any manufacturing operations and assessable as a manufactured product. Under Section 5 (viii) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, tax is leviable on sales of raw tobacco whether cured or uncured only at the point of first purchase effected in the State of Madras by a dealer at the rate of six pies for every rupee on his turnover. Under Clause (vii) of that section, the sale of cigars and cheroots at less than two annas per cigar or cheroot and beedies, snuff, chewing tobacco or any other product manufactured from tobacco shall be liable to tax only at the point of first sale effected in the State of Madras by a dealer but at the rate of six pies for every rupee on his turnover. There is a proviso to Sub-clause (viii) which states that where a dealer has been taxed in respect of his turnover relating to...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »