Chennai Court April 1962 Judgments
Pappu Reddiar and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-30-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad209; [1962]46ITR825(Mad)
Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. Two persons Pappu Reddiar and Sankaralingam Pillai, the appellants before us, had simple money claims against the estate of A. S. T. F. Rodrigues, whose sons are respondents 2 and 3. The creditors brought a suit for administration of the estate of the deceased Rodrigues ana in the course of administration it appears that a sum of about Rs. two lakhs had been brought into Court. There were income tax assessment proceedings in regard to the estate of the deceased in the hands of his sons, and the Income-tax Department, had a claim of nearly Rs. 2,38,819-14-0 by way of arrears of income tax. The Second Additional Income-tax Officer, Tuticorin, applied on behalf of the Union of India in I. A. No. 430 of 1957 in the administration suit referred to above for payment of the arrears clue to the department out of the monies in deposit in the administration suit.It was claimed on behalf of the petitioner who is the first respondent before us that as amongst the simple mo...
Tag this Judgment!C.A. Kalla Maistry Vs. Kanniammal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-26-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad210; (1963)2MLJ529
Ganapatia Pillai, J.1. The defendant is the appellant, the suit out of which this appeal arises was brought by the three respondents in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Ootacamund for maintenance on the ground alternatively that the first respondent was married to the appellant, or was at least his permanently kept concubine, and that respondents 2 and 3 were born to the first respondent by the appellant. The Subordinate Judge found against both cases, viz., the case of marpiage and permanent concubinage, and dismissed the suit. On appeal, the learned Additional District Judge, Coimbatore, found the case of permanent concubinage made out and granted a decree to respondents 2 and 3 awarding maintenance at the rate of Rs. 30 per month which was the rate which the Subordinate Judge indicated would be the maintenance payable if he had found that they were entitled to maintenance. The appellant seeks to dislodge the finding that the children (respondents 2 and 3) were born to him, on t...
Tag this Judgment!Chairman, Committee of Management, Integral Coach Factory Canteen Vs. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-26-1962
Reported in: [1962]13STC827(Mad)
ORDERVeeraswami, J.1. These petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution turn upon a common point as to whether sales of food and drink effected by the Integral Coach Factory Canteen to the workmen of the factory are liable to sales tax under the provisions of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959- For the year 1959-60 on the view that the sales are so liable, the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Perambur Division, who is the respondent, by his order dated 31st March, 1960, assessed the canteen provisionally on a turnover of Rs. 2,00,000, the tax levied being payable in 12 monthly instalments of Rs. 333 each. On the basis of the provisional assessment a demand in Form B was made upon the canteen for payment of the monthly tax. One of the petitions is to quash the provisional assessment and the other is for a mandamus forbidding the respondent from enforcing the demand. The petitioner, who is the Chairman of the Committee of Management, Integral Coach Factory Canteen, Madras, seeks th...
Tag this Judgment!Sebastia Pillai Vs. V.E.K. Kadher Meera Rowther and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-26-1962
Reported in: (1962)2MLJ530
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. This is an appeal against the Judgment of Basheer Ahmed Sayeed, J., in C.M.A. No. 21 of 1957. The decree-holder is the appellant. In respect of two mortgages executed by the respondent on 29th March, 1926 and 8th April, 1926, the latter being an anomalous mortgage the appellant filed a suit O.S. No. 295 of 1943 in the Chief Court at Pudukottah and obtained on 24th November, 1946 a preliminary decree for sale. The State of Pudukottai was then under the sovereignty of a Ruler. In March, 1948, the Ruler of this State acceded to the Indian Union. Earlier by the Extra Provincial Jurisdiction Act, 1947, (Central Act XLVII of 1947) the Central Government was enabled to exercise extra provincial jurisdiction in such a manner as it thought fit to determine the law and procedure to be observed in such areas. In exercise of the powers conferred by the above enactment the Central Government after the Ruler of the Pudukottah State acceded to the Indian Union passed the P...
Tag this Judgment!G.A. Kalla Maistry Vs. Kanniammal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-26-1962
Reported in: (1962)2MLJ529
Ganapatia Pillai, J.1. The defendant is the appellant. The suit out of which this appeal arises was brought by the three respondents in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Ootacamund for maintenance on the ground alternatively that the first respondent was married to the appellant, or was at least his permanently kept concubine, and that respondents 2 and 3 were born to the first respondent by the appellant. The Subordinate Judge found against both cases, viz., the case of marriage and permanent concubinage, and dismissed the suit. On appeal, the learned Additional District Judge, Coimbatore, found the case of permanent concubinage made out and granted a decree to respondents 2 and 3 awarding maintenance at the rate of Rs. 30 per month which was the rate which the Subordinate Judge indicated would be the maintenance payable if he had found that they were entitled to maintenance. The appellant seeks to dislodge the finding that the children (respondents 2 and 3) were born to him, on t...
Tag this Judgment!Alanduraiappar Koil Chithakkadu by Its Trustee M. Ramanada Nainar and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-25-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad94
Ramakrishnan, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge, Mayuram, in O. S. No. 18 of 1956. The suit was filedfor the recovery of Rs. 10,243-8-0 due as arrears of lease. The plaintiff is a temple, Sri Alanduraiappar Koil, Chuhakkadu, represented by its present trustees, plaintiffs 1 to 5. The 2nd defendant is the minor son of the first defendant. The temple owned a property called Shandy tope inside Mayuram municipality where fairs are held every Monday and where there are also some shops for carrying on daily sales. The right of collecting dues from the stall-keepers in the market as well as in the shops used, to be leased out. In an auction held on 24-2-1952, the first defendant took this on lease for a term of five years from 1-4-1952 at an annual rental of Rs. 12,000. However, the registration of the lease deed took place only on 12-9-1953. The first defendant became a defaulter, and on 1-1-1956, the arrears of rent stood at Rs. 10...
Tag this Judgment!Pazhaniandi Bakthar and anr. Vs. Co-operative Urban Bank Ltd., by Its ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-24-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad155
Anantanarayanan, J. 1. The first and second defendants are the appellants in an action by the Cooperative Urban Bank Ltd., Kumbakonam (plaintiff) for a mandatory injunction and for damages. It is not necessary to set forth the particulars upon which the suit was based, at any great length. 'It is sufficient to observe that, according to the plaintiff bank, the house property immediately to the west of the bank building belonged to the two defendants, and that they reconstructed, their house in such a manner as to obstruct the passage of light and air into the open windows of the bank buildings. This construction of a wall by the defendants above the proofing of their old building and immediately adjoining the windows of the bank building on the upper floor, has resulted in the diminution of accustomed light and air.2. The trial Court framed the necessary issues, and since the plaintiff bank reserved the basis of suit relating to denial of accustomed light and air by virtue of the wall ...
Tag this Judgment!D.P. Roy Chowdhury Vs. State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-23-1962
Reported in: [1962]13STC866(Mad)
ORDERVeeraswami, J.1. This petition is for a direction to the respondent State to forbear from assessing the petitioner to sales tax in respect of two bronze casts, one of Mahatma Gandhi, and the other named 'Triumph of Labour' which the petitioner made and supplied, the former to the Government of West Bengal at a cost of Rs. 60,000 and the latter to the Government of .Madras at a cost of Rs. 41,000. For the year 1958-59, the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Saidapet, called upon the petitioner to furnish a return of his gross turnover and his accounts. The petitioner disclosed the transactions in relation to the two statues but averred before the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer that he was neither a dealer nor the transactions were sales for the purpose of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939. The petitioner also stated that if at all, the transactions amounted to works contract not involving any element of taxable sale. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer by his notice dated 28th April,...
Tag this Judgment!Dharmakanny Nadar Siviseshamuthu and ors. Vs. Mahalingam Nadar Gopalak ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad147
Ramakrishnan, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge, Nagarcoil in A. S. No. 991 of 1957, which arose out of the decision of the District Munsif of Nagarcoil, in O. S. No. 60 of 1953. The facts, in so far as they are relevant for the disposal of the second appeal are briefly the following. The suit property is Survey No. 13911/A. 29 cents in extent, in the village of Needukara. On 22-1-1941, under the sale deed Ex. A. 1, first defendant purchased a property, the description of which is in the following terms :'Out of 14-1/2 cents forming the western half of Survey No. 13911/A after excluding 7-1/2 cents acquired for Circar road, 7 cents which have not yet been sub-divided and which are situate to the west and east of the road.'It is common ground that actual measurements made during the trial of the suit by the Commissioner of the road which cut across the above survey number diagonally from north-east to south-west came to only 4...
Tag this Judgment!K. Chidambara Mudaliar and ors. Vs. A.P. Arunachala Mudaliar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-19-1962
Reported in: (1962)2MLJ538
Anantanarayanan, J.1. The only point involved in this appeal by defendants 2 to 7 in the suit, who are members of a Panchayat Board, which was also sued as the first defendant, is with reference to the interpretation of Section 108 of the Madras Village Panchayats Act, 1950.2. Learned Counsel for the appellants concedes that he is concluded by the concurrent findings of the Courts below, with regard to the actual facts. It has thus been clearly found that the present appellants acted under the influence of malice and ill-will, and virtually, misused their powers as the members of this Panchayat. Because they did so, and that rendered them liable to be sued in damages in a Court of law, since they lacked bona fides altogether, though they purported to act in an official capacity, the learned Subordinate Judge has awarded a sum of Rs. 100 as damages to the plaintiff-respondent to be recovered from the appellants. The question is whether upon the proper interpretation of Section 108, the ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »