Chennai Court June 1962 Judgments
In Re: Jadayandi and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-28-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad83; 1963CriLJ301
ORDERSadasivam, J.1. Reference by the District Magistrate, North Arcot, to quash the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Cheyyar, directing re-trial of accused 5 Jadayandi and accused 7 Subramaniam in C. C. No. 371 of 1961 on the file of the Sub-Magistrate, Wallajah. Nine persons were charge-sheeted in C. C. No. 371 of 1961 on the file of the Sub-Magistrate, Wallajah, with having committed affray punishable under Section 160, I. P. C. But the Sub-Magistrate, Wallajah, acquitted three of the accused and convicted the rest and sentenced each of them to pay a fine of Rs. 15 and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for two days. Four of the convicted persons alone preferred an appeal to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Cheyyar, against their convictions and sentences. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Cheyyar, who heard the appeal set aside the convictions and sentences not only against the four persons who preferred appeals to him, but also as regards accused 5 Jadayandi and accused 7 ...
Tag this Judgment!Board of Directors of the South Arcot Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-28-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad192; [1963(6)FLR413]; (1963)ILLJ5Mad; (1963)IMLJ349
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. The appeal and the writ petition referred to above arise out of applications filed under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, by Elumalai and Mohamed Khan, respectively, who were originally employed by the South Arcot Electricity Distribution Co., Ltd., to be referred to hereafter as the company. The questions that fall to be considered in the two cases are common and it will be convenient to deal with them together. The company was incorporated in 1943 and having secured a licence from the Government for the purpose, it was doing business in distributing electric energy in the South Arcot District. The undertaking was taken over by the State Government with effect from 1-6-1957 under Section 4(1) of the Madras Electricity Supply Undertakings (Acquisition) Act, 1954. The Act enables the Government to declare any undertaking not previously taken over bythem to vest in itself. On such acquisition, the licencee became entitled to compensation. ...
Tag this Judgment!Central United Bank Ltd. and anr. Vs. B.A. Venkatarama Naidu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-28-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad302; (1953)1MLJ345
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. This appeal raises a question about the liability of a retired partner who failed to give public notice of his retirement with respect to dealings of the continuing partners of the firm with a third party.2. Three persons Ramakrishna Chettiar, Ramaswami Nadar and Venkatarama Naidu, the defendants to the suit out of which this appeal arises, carried on business in partnership as grocers in Rajapalayam. The first among them, Ramakrishna Chettiar, was the managing partner. He also happened to be the President of the Central United Bank, which is now represented by the appellant, a limited liability banking concern of the place. The partnership firm had overdraft facilities with the bank. On 8th February 1946, Venkatarama Naidu (the third defendant) retired from the partnership. His retirement is evidenced by a document, Ex. B. 4, executed between the partners.Under the arrangement referred to therein the remaining two partners were alleged to run the business a...
Tag this Judgment!D.S. Seshadri Vs. Jayalakshmi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-27-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad283; (1953)1MLJ11
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J. 1. This civil revision petition arises out of an order passed by the Principal Judge, City Civil Court, Madras, in a matrimonial cause granting permanent alimony to the respondent, the wife of the petitioner under the provisions of Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act (Act 25 of 1955). The facts which give rise to this civil revision petition are these:The respondent was married to the petitioner on 11-1-1951. Soon thereafter the couple set up their home at Madras where the husband was employed as a clerk in the Revenue Department of the Government of Madras, on a modest salary of about Rs. 120 per month. The marriage unfortunately was not a success and there were misunderstandings between the couple even from the very beginning. Within a month after they set up their home, the wife left her husband for her father's house at Conjeevaram taking with her all her belongings, Attempts by husband to bring her back did not succeed, but it is stated that the responde...
Tag this Judgment!W.P.A. Soundarapandian and Brothers Vs. the Deputy Commercial Tax Offi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-27-1962
Reported in: [1962]13STC870(Mad)
ORDERVeeraswami, J.1. This is a petition for a writ of prohibition directing the respondents from taking further proceedings against the petitioner's firm in pursuance of a notice dated 22nd August, 1960, asking the petitioner to produce accounts.2. The petitioner is a firm of planters, and owns cardamom estates in Lower Palnys, Madurai District. The estates are said to be situated .in the interior and as it is difficult for the labourers to get their own provisions and grocery, the petitioner used to buy them and supply the same to the labourers as a matter of convenience and amenity to them without any motive of profit, and adjust the sale price against the wages to be paid to the labourers. In such circumstances, according to the petitioner, the transactions of supply of food-grains and grocery to the labourers are not in the course of any business, and do not amount to sales within the meaning of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959. For the same reason, the petitioner states tha...
Tag this Judgment!N.S. Nataraja Iyer Vs. Subramania Iyer and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-27-1962
Reported in: (1962)2MLJ488
Kunhamed Kutti, J.1. In this Civil Revision Petition against the order of the Principal Judge, City Civil Court, Madras, the short question for consideration is whether the said order directing the impleading of Subramania Iyer, the first respondent-third-party, as a party defendant in O.S. No. 1508 of 1957, is liable to be interfered with. Subramania Iyer sought to get himself impleaded as a party to O.S. No. 1508 of 1957 on the file of the Sixth Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, under Order 22, Rule 10, Civil Procedure Code, by I.A. No. 617 of 1959 having purchased the rights of respondents 2 and 3 herein in certain properties, thatched huts in a piece of land of the extent of 3 grounds and 350 sq.ft. bearing Door No. 28, Lloyds Road, Mylapore, comprised in R.S. No. 1094 Block No. 23, Mylapore Division, Plot No. 4 in the Corporation Layout No. 13 of 1951, together with the leasehold rights in the said land and all the rights conferred upon the vendors by the order in LA. No. 773 of ...
Tag this Judgment!Registrar of Companies Vs. P. Arunajatai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-26-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad99; [1962]32CompCas1153(Mad); 1963CriLJ302
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C. J.1. This is a reference under Section 21 of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 by the Council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants, which found the respondent guilty of professional misconduct, namely, gross negligence in the conduct of professional duties. The respondent is a chartered accountant at Madras who commenced practising as an auditor in the year 1931. After a few years of practice he left the profession and took up war service. That was during the years 1944 to 1946. On being discharged from the service he was employed in one of the several of the companies promoted by the late Dr. Alagappa Chettiar a prominent businessman and a great philanthropist of his time. But the respondent did not continue there for any length of time; he reverted to his profession as auditor in 1951. It is stated on his behalf that he has not been very successful in the profession either. His previous association with Dr. Alagappa Chettiar presumably secured for him a...
Tag this Judgment!P.S. Duraikannoo Vs. M. Saravana Chettiar and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-26-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad468; (1963)2MLJ399
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment and decree of the Fifth Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Madras in O. S. No. 1654 of 1957. The suit was instituted by the appellant for specific performance of a contract of sale of premises No. 41 Veda Vinayakar Koil St., Purasawalkam, Madras. The facts which save rise to the suit are these -2. In the year 1954, the second respondent who was the owner of the suit property No. 41 Veda Vinayakar Koil Street (now known as Perambur Barracks Road, Purasawalkam, Madras,) created an equitable mortgage over it for securing a sum of money advanced to him by the first respondent, it is not disputed that the transaction conferred on the mortgagee a power to sell the mortgaged property. There was default in payment of the mortgage amount as stipulated. The first respondent purporting to act under the power of sale, caused the suit property to be sold by public auction through Messrs. Murray and Co., auctioneers. The relevant condit...
Tag this Judgment!Pappu Reddiar Vs. P.S.V. Rm. Ramanatha Iyer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-25-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad45
Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. This appeal arises from the judgment of Ganapatia Pillai, J. and involves the determination of a question relating to award of interest while directing restitution. Muthuswami Reddiar, since deceased, whose estate is now represented by the appellant, had certain monetary dealings with the respondent, in respect of which he filed a suit and obtained a decree in the Sub-Court at Tirunelveli for a sum of Rs. 10643-12-0 towards principal and interest and Rs. 1473-10-0 as for costs. Against that decree the respondent filed an appeal to this Court, A. S. No. 121 of 1951. Along with the appeal he filed an application for stay of execution of the decree. By order dated 9-4-1951 this Court granted conditional relief by directing stay of execution of the trial Court's decree, if the respondent were to deposit the entire amount in the lower court within a specified time. It was also provided that the decree-holder could draw the amount deposited on furnishing security for...
Tag this Judgment!Av. P.L. Ct. Ramanathan Chettiar and anr. Vs. N.L.P. Lakshmanan Chetti ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-25-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad175; (1963)IMLJ46
Ramachandra Iyer, C.J. 1. This appeal which concerns a question relating to the extent of properties sold in an execution sale, has been directed to be posted before a Full Bench in view of a contention that the decision in Parathasarathi Naidu In re : (1957)2MLJ250 required reconsideration. Before proceeding to deal with that point, we shall set out the facts which have given rise to this appeal. 2. Within the limits of the Karaikudi Municipality, certain number of persons (about 80 in number) owned in common a large extent of land consisting of about 37 items. Disputes arose between the co-sharers regarding the partition of the properties. That was sometime prior to the year 1952. The matter was taken up by means of a suit for partition in the Sub-Court, Devakottai. While the litigation was pending, default was made in the payment of the property tax that fell due for the propertyto the municipality. The municipality thereupon instituted O. S. No. 16 of 1952 in the Sub-Court, Devakot...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »