Chennai Court September 1961 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.
P. Venkataswami, Receiver, in T.O.S. No. 9 of 1947 Vs. Abdul Rahim and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-13-1961
Reported in: (1962)1MLJ406
Jagadisan, J.1. The petitioner in these two Revision Petitions is the Receiver appointed in the proceedings in T.O.S. No. 9 of 1947 on the file of the Original Side of this Court. As such Receiver he let out a tiled shop, premises No. 13 and a godown, premises No. 9 in the Evening Bazaar Road, Park Town, Madras, on a monthly rental of Rs. 300 to a firm of merchants, Abdul Rahim & Brothers. The terms of the lease were approved and sanctioned by an order of Court, dated 29th September, 1955. The lease was for a period of three years from 22nd July, 1955. The lessee undertook to effect the annual repairs, including white-washing, to the buildings, at his expense.2. The lessee, after having been in occupation of the premises paying the rent of Rs. 300 per month for a period of 2 years after the lease, filed an application. H.R.C. No. 1755 of 1957 before the House Rent Controller, Madras, praying for fixation of fair rent for the premises. The Receiver, the landlord, resisted the applicatio...
A.S. Shaik Mohamed Maracair Vs. C. Mohideen Kutty
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-13-1961
Reported in: (1962)2MLJ222
Jagadisan, J.1. Thc petitioner in C.R.P. No. 1698 of 1960 is the owner of premises No. 206, Angappa Naicken Street, G.T., Madras, and the respondent is his tenant in the said premises. We shall refer to the petitioner as the landlord and the respondent as the tenant in (his judgment. The tenant filed an application before the House Rent Controller at Madras in H.R.C. No. 4968 of 1959 praying for fixation of a fair rent of the premises at Rs. 100 per month. He was actually paying a rent of Rs. 275 per month from March, 1958, onwards. The landlord contended that even the rent of Rs. 275 paid by the tenant was far below the fair rent payable for the premises and that therefore the application should be dismissed. The House Rent Controller after an enquiry fixed the fair rent at Rs. 200 per month. Both the landlord and the tenant preferred appeals in the Court of Small Causes at Madras and the learned appellate Judge fixed the fair rent at Rs. 225 per month. Hence two Civil Revision Petiti...
S. Ethiraja Mudaliar Vs. the Revenue Divisional Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-08-1961
Reported in: (1962)1MLJ388
ORDERSrinivasan, J.1. The petitioner is the Municipal Chairman of the Chingleput Municipal Council. He seeks for a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ to restrain the Revenue Divisional Officer from placing before the Council a notice of motion of no confidence duly presented to him by certain members of the Municipal Council.2. According to the petitioner, he received a notice from the Revenue Divisional Officer informing him that a written notice of intention to make a motion of no confidence against the petitioner had been presented to the Revenue Divisional Officer on 17th August, 1961, under Section 40-A(2) of the District Municipalities. Act. The Revenue Divisional Officer gave notice to the petitioner that a meeting of the Municipal Council would be held in that connection at 3 P.M. on 12th September, 1961. A copy of the no confidence motion was also attached to this notice issued to the petitioner. It is to prevent the Revenue Divisional Officer from holding the meeting ...
The Ouchterlony Valley Estate (1938) Ltd. Vs. State of Madras Represen ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-07-1961
Reported in: (1962)1MLJ152
Jagadisan, J.1. The Ouchterlony Valley Estates (1938), Limited, Kozhikode, the petitioner in T.C. No. 95 of 1959 owns coffee and tea plantations in Gudalur. In computing the agricultural income-tax payable by them under Madras Act (V of 1955) for the assessment year 1957-58 they claimed the following, among other reliefs. (1) the sum of Rs. 5,849 representing sale-proceeds of the coffee crop relating to the year 1951-52 and received during the year ended 31st March, 1957, ought not to be included as part of the agricultural income of the accounting year (1st April, 1956 to 31st March, 1957), (2) the sum of Rs. 58,132 described as replanting expenses ought to be allowed as deduction in computing the total income, (3) depreciation allowance of the coffee machinery for the whole year.2. The Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Gudalur, held that the sum of Rs. 5,849 representing sale-proceeds of crop relating to the season 1951-52 was properly included in the income of the accounting year, th...
P. Haji Abdul Wahab and Brothers, Pernambut Vs. Government of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-06-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Mad250; [1962]13STC824(Mad)
Jagadisan, J. (1) The petitioner in these two revision petitions is a firm of partnership doing business as dealers in hides and skins, and tanners. In respect of its business turnover in the year 1955-56 under the Madras General Sales-tax Act, the petitioner claimed three items of sale of tanned hides and skins ; (i) sale in favour of P. Haji Abdul Wahab and sons, Madras for Rs. 7,60,278 13-7; (ii) sale in favour of Messrs. Rallis India Ltd. For Rs. 11,77,329-2-0 and (iii) sale in favour of Messrs, Gordon Woodroffe and Co. For Rs. 35198-0-3, as being exempt from taxation on the ground that they were sales which occasioned an export or that they were sales in the course of export to foreign territories. The Deputy Commercial tax Officer, Gudiyattam held that the sales in favour of Haji Abdul Wahab and Sons, Madras were export sales, but that the other two sales were local sales. There was an appeal to the Commercial tax Officer by the assessee which was however dismissed. The Commercia...
M. Veerabadra Konar Vs. the State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-06-1961
Reported in: [1962]13STC556(Mad)
ORDERSrinivasan, J.1. The assessee was assessed for the year 1953-54 on a turnover of Rs. 2,57,092. Subsequently, it was discovered on a verification of the bank accounts that large amounts had been received by the assessee in the name of Sriranga Konar, Veerabadra Konar and Paramasivam. Veerabadra Konar is the assessee. Paramasivam was his partner in the partnership business covered by the original assessment. Sriranga Konar is said to have been an employee in the business. On the discovery that the business was in receipt of large amounts, a revision of the assessment was undertaken. Notice was served upon the assessee on 15th March, 1957. Beyond asking for time, the assessee did not explain the transactions. As the revision of the assessment would be barred by time by 31st March, 1957, the assessing authority declined to grant any further time and fixed the net turnover at Rs. 6,57,092, that is, by the addition of a sum of Rs. four lakhs. The successive appeals to the Commercial Tax...
M.R.K. Abdul Salam and Co. Vs. the Government of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-06-1961
Reported in: [1962]13STC629(Mad)
ORDERJagadisan, J.1. The petitioner is a business firm of partnership at Panipet, North Arcot district, dealing in hides and skins. It also does business as tanners converting raw hides and skins into dressed goods and selling them. The firm is a licensed dealer and tanner under the Madras General Sales Tax Act exigible to tax under that Act. For the year 1955-56 the firm submitted a return of nil turnover to the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Arcot. The officer scrutinised the firm's accounts and assessed the firm on a net turnover of Rs. 4,92,191-3-9. This turnover included the purchase value of raw skins and hides in the State, sales value of tanned skins sold inside the State and the sales value of waste materials like javvu, mudi etc. On appeal by the firm, the Commercial Tax Officer, Vellore, reduced the net turnover to Rs. 4,57,295-6-3. There was a further appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal by the assessee which ended in a confirmation of the assessment of the taxing aut...
In Re: P. Ramaswamy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-06-1961
Reported in: 1962CriLJ146; (1962)2MLJ210
Veeraswami, J.1. The appellant who was the Editor and Publisher of a Tamil Weekly called ' Nathigam ' has been convicted of an offence under Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 200 on each of two counts in respect of two articles published in the Journal, dated 20th February, 1959. This appeal is directed against the conviction and sentence.2. Section 295-A makes it an offence to speak or write any words with a deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of any class of citizens of India or insulting or attempting to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of that class. To constitute the offence the necessary ingredients are (1) words either spoken or written or visible representations, (2) deliberate and malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of any class of citizens of India or (3) deliberate and malicious intention to insult or attempt to insult the religion or religious beliefs of such a class. The ar...
C. Ekambare Mudaliar Vs. Sivasankara Mudaliar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-01-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Mad263
S. Ramachandra Iyer, Offg.C.J.(1) This is an appeal from the judgment of Jagadisan, J., declining to grant leave to appeal in forma pauperis against the decree in O. S. No. 827 of 1958 on the file of the City Civil Court, Madras. That matter came up for orders as to admission before us on 24th August 1961. We found that the judgment of the City Civil Judge could prima facie be said to be erroneous in law for the limited purpose of granting leave under Order 44, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. But we were of opinion that before setting aside the judgment of the learned Judge of this court, notice to the respondent was necessary, albeit the order appealed against was passed in his absence, and we directed notice to issue. The appellant did not, however, take notice as directed but he has instead requested the matter to be spoken to before us today bringing to our attention the decision in Chennamma, in re, ILR 53 Mad 245 : AIR 1931 Mad 198. That decision referred to certain earlie...
Official Receiver, High Court, Madras and Vs. Ar. Rm. Ramanathan Chett ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-01-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Mad192; [1962]32CompCas395(Mad)
(1) This is an appeal from the judgment of Balakrishna Aiyar, J., rejecting a claim made on behalf of the Link Industries Ltd., (which is now under liquidation) in respect of certain calls made upon the respondent by the directors at a time when the company was a going concern. A few facts must be stated in order to appreciate the point on controversy in this appeal. The Link Industries Ltd., was incorporated in 1946 as a public limited company. There was no adequate response for the taking up of its shares even in the initial stages. On 13-8-1947, the company issued 50,000 shares on the nominal value of Rs. 10 each. Ramanathan Chettiar the respondent applied for and was allotted 36,555 shares. On allotment he paid a sum of Rs. 5/- for each share the balance being uncalled at the time.On 27-7-1949 the Link Industries Ltd., created a security by way of English mortgage to the Industrial Financial Corporation of India go cover an advance made by the latter in a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/-. Th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »