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.
Rayadurai Padayachi Vs. Muthuswami Padayachi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-01-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Mad489
(1) This revision petition arises out of the judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge of Salem in appeal, under section 47 Civil Procedure Code, setting aside the order of the executing Court extending the time for specific performance. In O. S. No. 278 of 1957, the petitioner and the respondents entered into a compromise which was subsequently-made a decree of court. The decree stated,'1. That the plaintiff do deposit into court Rs. 200 on or before 11-8-1958, that the third defendant do get Rs. 1,200/- (Rs. thousand deposited already by the plaintiff plus Rs. 200/- to be deposited by the plaintiff on or before 11-8-1958) towards the mortgage debt dated 22-5-1957 by first defendant to the third defendant, that the, third defendant has agreed that the debt so far as-it relates to the suit be and the game is cleared; that the third defendant shall proceed against the other mortgaged properties (except the suit properties) for the balance of the mortgage amount; that the third defendant...
Lakshmi Ammal and anr. Vs. AllauddIn Sahib
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-01-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Mad247; (1962)1MLJ187
(1) This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Madurai, in A. S. No. 55 of 1957, which was in appeal from the decision of the District Munsif, Madurai taluk at Madurai in O. S. No. 244 of 1955.(2) The facts of the case so far as they are necessary for the consideration of the points in issue in this second appeal are the following.(3) The suit property is 54 cents of nanja land. It originally belonged to one Subbiah Pillai. Subbiah Pillai executed a will, Ex. A-1 dated 5-8-1931 and died son afterwards. He left behind his widow, Lakshmi Ammal, and two daughters Amirthammal and Ammakutti alias Vadamalai Ammal. The will purported to deal with the suit property (item 1) and another item of property (item 2). It gives these two properties to the widow with absolute rights and also provided that after her lifetime item 1 (suit property) should go to Amirthammal and item 2 should go to Ammakutti. Amirthammal was married to Muthuswami P...
Sellammal Vs. Periammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-01-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Mad144; (1962)1MLJ147
(1) One periaswami Gurukkal had a son Guruswami by his first wife. Periaswami married the plaintiff Sellammal in the suit when he was old and when plaintiff was about 18 years of age. At the time of his second marriage to the plaintiff, he executed in her favour a registered sale deed Ex. A. 1 dated 20-6-1947, reciting a consideration of Rs. 200 in cash, and conveying items 1 to 4. Subsequently he fell out with the plaintiff and there were misunderstandings between them. Thereafter under Ex. A. 4 dated 6-10-1954 he cancelled Ex. A. 1. He followed this up by executing on 9-10-1954 a document Ex. A. 5 a settlement deed in favour of Guruswami Gurukkal his first wife's son conveying all his properties including the properties covered by Ex. A. 1 Under Ex. A. 6 dated 18-7-1955 Periaswami Gurukkal proceeding on the footing that Ex. A. 5 had become inoperative, executed another settlement deed giving items 5 to 18 to the plaintiff and some other items to his daughter-in-law. Guruswami's wife....
C. Ekambara Mudaliar Vs. Sivasankara Mudaliar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-01-1961
Reported in: (1962)1MLJ200
Ramachandra Iyer, O.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 fudge 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 to-day bringing to our attention the decision in Chennamma, In re (1929) 58 M.L.J. 195 : I.L.R. Mad. 254. That decision referred to certain earlier ...
S. Santhosa Nadar Vs. the First Additional Income-tax Officer and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-01-1961
Reported in: (1962)1MLJ411
ORDERSrinivasan, J.1. This is a petition for the review of the order made in the writ petition mentioned above. That writ petition sought for the issue of a writ' of certiorari to call for the records of the First Additional Income-tax Officer, Tuticorin, and to quash the order of assessment, dated 26th March, 1956, for the assessment year 1947-48. In order to appreciate the point that arises in this petition for review, it is necessary to state certain facts that arose for consideration in the abovementioned writ petition and another writ petition, No. 1269 of ig6of, which was also heard at the same time.2. The petitioner, a resident of Tirunelveli, carried on business in Ceylon. He did not file any returns of his income for the assessment years 1945-46, 1946-47 and 1947-48 in response to the general notice published under Section 22 (1) of the Income-tax Act, but on 20th March, 1954, he voluntarily filed returns for all the three years. These returns were ignored by the Income-tax Of...
S. Santhosa Nadar Vs. First Additional Income-tax Officer, TuticorIn a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-01-1961
Reported in: [1962]46ITR411(Mad)
This is a petition for the review of the order made in the writ petition mentioned above. That writ petition sought for the issue of writ certiorari to call for the records of the First Additional Income-tax Officer, Tuticorin, and to quash the order of assessment dated March 26, 1956, for the assessment year 1947-48. In order to appreciate the point that arises in this petition for review, it is necessary to state certain facts that arose for consideration in the above-mentioned writ petition and another writ petition. No. 1268 of 1960, which was also heard at the same time.The petitioner, a resident of Tirunelveli, carried on business in Ceylon. He did not file any returns of his income for the assessment years 1945-46, 1946-47 and 1947-48 in response to the general notice published under section 22(1) of the Income-tax Act, but on March 20, 1954, he voluntarily filed returns for all the three years. These returns were ignored by the Income-tax Officer, who, with reference to the ass...
P. K. N. Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-01-1961
Reported in: [1963]47ITR195(Mad)
SRINIVASAN J. - A registered firm of the vilasam of 'P. K. N.' was carrying on money-lending business at several places in India as well as in Malaya. In the year 1937, the partners of the firm incorporated a private limited company under the name of 'P. K. N. Company Ltd.' This company is the assessee. We shall refer in due course to the memorandum and articles of association of the company. To this company were transferred all the properties of the erstwhile partners of the firm, such properties as were situated in the district of Muar in Malaya. These properties consisted of several rubber and coconut plantations, houses and vacant sites. The process of this transfer which was item by item went on till 1940. The total value of the purchases came roughly to 16 1/2 lakhs of dollars. In the year of account ending 31st March, 1941, the company also purchased an estate known as Lee Rubber Estate for 2,62,655 dollars. This property is said to have adjoined the other rubber estates owned b...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›