Chennai Court November 1962 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.
S.P. Shanmughasundaram Vs. Marudachala Goundar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-12-1962
Reported in: (1963)1MLJ291
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. This appeal which concerns the validity of an election to the office of the Chairman of Sircar Samakulam Panchayat Union Council, Coimbatore District reveals a perversity of procedure at the election. The appellant and the first respondent were the rival candidates for the Chairmanship of the Union Council, The election to that office was held at a meeting of the Council held on 24th April, 1962 under the presidency of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Coimbatore. The voting was by secret ballot and of the thirteen votes recorded one was found to be invalid, and the remaining twelve votes were equally distributed between the contesting candidates each securing six votes. Lots were drawn to decide the tie; the chit containing the name of the first respondent Was drawn. Nevertheless the Revenue Divisional Officer (who was the Returning Officer) declared the appellant as elected. This is somewhat a startling procedure which was sought to be justified on the groun...
Sree Siddhi Budhi Vinayakagar Sree Sundareswarar Devastanam Represente ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-07-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad369
Ramachandra Iyer, C. J. 1. Two questions fall to be decided in this appeal, onewith respect to the applicability of Section 9 of the Madras City Tenants Protection Act, 1921, to a property owned by a Hindu religious institution over which the trustee or the Manager has only a qualified power of disposal, and the second as to the true construction of Section 47 of the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act of 1882. 2. The appellant, Sri Siddhi Budhi Vinayakar Sree Sundareswarar Devastanam is a Hindu temple which owned a considerable tract of land in St. George's Cathedral Road, Royapettah. Out of that extent, its trustee leased out a small plot measuring 25 ft. by 35 ft. (the date of the lease not being in evidence) to the respondent on a rent of Re. 1 per mensem. There is nothing to show that the respondent was prohibited from putting up any building on the land. On the other hand, it appears fairly clear that he was permitted to put up a building thereon which hedid, the precise, point of ...
A.G. Ranganatha Nayagar Vs. K. Kamalakannan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-07-1962
Reported in: AIR1964Mad42
Anantanarayanan, J.1. With reference to the Madras-cum-Chingleput-cum-North Arcot District (Local Authorities) Constituency for the Madras Legislative Council, a by-election occurred consequent on the vacancies caused by the retirement of four members. The notification in respect of this by-election . was published in the Fort St. George Gazette, Madras, on the 5th March 1960. 15th March 1960 was fixed as the last day for receiving nominations, the scrutiny was upon the 18th March and the 21st March was the last day determined for the withdrawal of nominations. The Andhra Pradesh and Madras (Alteration of Boundaries) Act LVI of 1959, came into force, as provided for Under Section 1(2) of that Act, on the 1st of April 1960. It is not in dispute that, under this Act, certain areas originally forming part of Chittoor District of Andhra Pradesh (Tiruttani and Prodattur Panchayats) were added to the Constituency, Madras-cum-Chingleput-cum-North Arcot district, by retaining the identity of t...
Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Coimbatore Division Vs. Stane ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-07-1962
Reported in: [1963]14STC369(Mad)
Srinivasan, J.1. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Coimbatore Division, is the petitioner. The petition prays for a revision of the order of the Appellate Tribunal, the finding of the Tribunal which is attacked as erroneous being that in respect of the sales of tractors by the assessee, M/s. Stanes Motors (South India) Limited to two tea estates, the turnover in respect of those sales was entitled to the benefit of the lower rate of taxation under Section 8(1)(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act. The facts in brief are these : The assessee sold tractors to four factories in Kerala State between December, 1957, and February, 1958. The assessee is a registered dealer ; so also are the tea factories under the Central Sales Tax Act. These are admittedly inter-State sales. The Joint Commercial Tax Officer who made the order of assessment conceded that the sales of these tractors to the four factories are covered by 'C' forms so that, according to him, there was compliance with the re...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras Vs. S. Shanmuga Moopanar.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-06-1962
Reported in: [1964]53ITR694(Mad)
SRINIVASAN J. - One Subbiah Moopanar left a will dated 25th February, 1954. Under this will he made various bequests and left the rest of his estate to Shanmuga Moopanar, the minor son of his brother, Sankara Moopanar. One of the clauses in the will stated :'In the calendar year following a couple of years after my death, the said minor, Shanmuga Moopanar, shall create a charity trust under the name and style; T. S. Subbia Moopanar Memorial Charity Trust. He shall save by investing in the said nidhi on the 1st of June in every calendar year at the rate of rupees ten thousand per year, from and out of the net profit, excluding expenses, got from my estate which shall be succeeded by him and remain in his enjoyment. He shall pay to the said nidhi from the date of commencement of the nidhi for a period of ten years at the rate of rupees ten thousand per year in cash and should see that a sum of rupees one lack be finally invested as capital for my charity trust. While saving is made i the...
Kathan Nadar Company Vs. State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-05-1962
Reported in: [1963]14STC694(Mad)
Jagadisan, J.1. The petitioner in this case is a dealer in jaggery. The State in exercise of its powers under Section 6 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act issued a notification exempting the sale of jaggery from sales tax with effect from 1st April, 1958. Though the publication of this notification was on 23rd April, 1958, it was to take effect from 1st April, 1958. The petitioner, however, collected sales tax on jaggery sold to its customers from 1st April, 1958, till it became aware of the Government notification granting exemption from sales tax in the case of jaggery a week later than the date of publication of the notification. That, it did bona fide as but for the notification of the Government, the petitioner was entitled to collect tax on the sales effected and to pay the amount so collected to the State. After the publication of the notification, finding that the tax so far collected from its purchasers was not properly leviable, the petitioner refunded the amounts collected ...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Manji Raghu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-05-1962
Reported in: 1964CriLJ94
ORDERT.P. Naik, J.1. The non applicants, Manji Raghu and Ramnik lal Rathore, are partners of Shri Swami NerayarN Rice Mill, Rajnandgaon, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Mill1). The Mill is situated in Chowkadiyapara locality of the town of Rajnandgaon. On 30-5-1961, a number of inhabitants of the locality filed an application under Section 133 of the Coda of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') against the non applicants as owners of the Mill alleging that the husk (Kondha and bhusa) produced by the working of the Mill and the working of the Mill at night was injurious to the health and physical comfort of the community and prayed that the nuisance be removed.2. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Rajnandgaon, holding that the flying of the husk as well as the working of the Mill at flight was a nuisance injurious to the health and physical comfort of the inhabitants of the locality conditionally ordered the non-applicants to remove- the aforesaid nuisance within fort...
Kandaswami Gounder Vs. Nachammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-02-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad263; 1963CriLJ166
ORDERSadasivam, J. 1. Petition to revise the order of the Additional First Class Magistrate, Pollachi, under Section 488(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, directing the petitioner to pay Rs. 20 per mensem to his wife and Rs. 5 per mensem to his child for maintenance. The petitioner married the respondent about 6 1/2 or 7 years prior to this case and lived with her for two years. Then the respondent became 'pregnant and gave birth to a child, Easwaraswami. Three months after the birth of the child, the respondent became demented. But she subsequently recovered her mental health. The respondent is living in her father's house. She claimed maintenance for herself and her child on the ground that the petitioner married a second wife, and refused and neglected to maintain her. The respondent denied the fact of his having married a second wife and offered to take back his wife and child. The learned Additional First Class Magistrate did not accept the case of the respondent, but accepted th...
Pappa Ammal Vs. Pandiyan Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-02-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad480
ORDERS. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. The learned Subordinate Judge has allowed the widow of the deceased Manicka Chetty to be impleaded as a party to O.S. No. 79 of 1961 and this civil revision petition is directed against the order. Unfortunately, in making the order, the learned Subordinate Judge did not decide the question whether the widow of the deceased Manicka Chetty was either a necessary party or even a proper party. But he contented himself with saying that, if it were to be found in the suit that she was not a necessary party, the suit would have to be dismissed against her. This is a very unsatisfactory way of disposing of the matter. Before a Court impleads a particular person as a party to a suit, it is its duty to find even at that stage whether that party is a necessary party or a proper party. It will be only abdicating its duty if it were to reserve that question to a later stage, impleading the person as a party and exposing him to all the travails of a litigation. It is...
P.K. Palaniappa Gounder Vs. K.M. Sridharan Nair and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-02-1962
Reported in: AIR1964Mad285
Ganapatia Pillai, J.1. Appeal No. 355 of 1959 is directed against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge of Coimbatore in O.S. No. 78 of 1958. The plaintiff in that litigation is the appellant in the appeal. He brought that suit for recovery of possession, past mesne profits and future mesne profits at the rats of Rs 100 per month till date of delivery of possession against Sridharan Nair, Padmanabha Menon and K.M.S. Nair. The plaintiff in that litigation, who will hereafter be referred to as the appellant was the owner of a vacant site situated in Jail Road, Coimbatore city. The appellant leased this site to one Vasudevan Nair on 27-9-1945 for a period of 12 years. The rent agreed was Rs. 25 per month for the first six years and Rs. 30 per month for the next six years. It was also agreed under the lease arrangement that the lessee should put up a building at the site as per specifications contained in the lease deed, enjoy the building for 12 years and at the termination of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »