Chennai Court September 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.
M. Gomathinarayagam Pillai and ors. Vs. Sri Manthramurthi High School ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-17-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad387; (1963)1MLJ56
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C. J. 1. This is an appeal against an order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge of Tirunelveli returning a plaint presented in due conformity with the provisions of Section 92 of the C. P. Code for presentation to the proper Court, the Company Court. One Manthiram Pillai established on 15th May, 1918, a middle School for the benefit of the general public of Tirunelveli Town. In a short time the school developed into a High School and the founder in order to put its management on a firm basis executed a document vesting the school and its properties in a Committee called the Manthiramurthi High School Committee providing inter alia for the appointment and succession to the office of the members of the committee. The Committee was registered under Section 26 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 (which corresponds to Section 25 of the 1956 Act). That provides for the incorporation of associations which are not formed for the purpose of making any profit in the sense ...
Collector of Customs Vs. Hazarimall K. Shah, Proprietor of J. Hazarima ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-17-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad399; (1963)1MLJ220
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment of Rajagopala Aiyangar, J. quashing the order of the Collector of Customs, Madras, who adjudged under Section 182 of the Sea Customs Act that the 46 cases of electrical bulbs imported by the respondent in the first week of June 1957 were liable to be confiscated as being in contravention of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, but giving an option to the respondent to pay a fine of Rs. 18,500 in lieu of confiscation. The fine has been paid and the goods cleared.2. The respondent on whom the fine was imposed is a merchant at Madras doing business in electrical goods. He held a licence under the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947, for the import of goods falling under Serial No. 38-A(f) of the Import Trade Control Policy for the licencing period, July-December 1956. On 29-1-1957 the respondent placed an order with a firm in Japan for 8350 dozens of miniature cap bulbs and the goods which were consigned in 46 cases arr...
The Official Receiver Vs. P.R.M. and Co. and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-14-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad201; (1963)1MLJ65
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J. 1. Both the Courts below are in error when they held that the application filed by the judgment-debtor was one under Order 21 Rule 90 C. P. C. and not under Section 47. It is clear from the case set out in the application for setting aside the sale for the judgment-debtor attacked the very order for sale, stating that the order was procured by misrepresenting the facts to the court, and that therefore the order was illegal. An illegality of that kind will not amount to a mere irregularity or illegality in the publication or conduct of the sale, so as to come within Order 21 Rule 90 C. P. C. The judgment-debtor will therefore have a right to challenge the sale that is the outcome of an order procured by a fraudulent misrepresentation in proceedings under Section 47 C. P. C. The executing Court will then have no power or jurisdiction to demand security from the judgment debtor, as it did in the present case.This, however, is not the only error in the order or th...
Periyakarupa thevar and ors. Vs. Vellai Alias Ocha thevar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-14-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad338; 1963CriLJ381; (1963)1MLJ376
Jagadisan, J. 1. These civil revision petitions have been directed to be heard by a Division Bench by order of the learned Chief Justice in view of the importance of the question that is raised and, because, the decision of a single Judge of this court in Kodammal v. Duraiswami Naicker, : AIR1961Mad384 is challenged as not having been correctly decided.2. The undisputed facts are as follows. A dispute in respect of possession of certain lands gave rise to a proceeding under Section 145 Crl. P. C. before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Usilampatti who is the Executive I Class Magistrate, Usilam-patti. Before, the learned Magistrate one Periya Karuppa Thevar and 9 others were the B party and one Vellia alias Ocha Thevar constituted the A party. The learned magistrate, being apparently of the opinion that the question which party was in possession on the crucial date, namely, the date of the preliminary order could not be satisfactorily determined by him, referred the matter to the Distri...
S.M. Ar. Ramaswami Chettiar Vs. S.M.A.M. Rm. Ramaswami Chettiar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-14-1962
Reported in: AIR1964Mad39
Veeraswami, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore, appointing the plaintiff-petitioner as a receiver to take charge and manage the suit charities, their properties and funds from the first defendant and to manage the same during the pendency of the suit. It is common ground that the charities constitute a private trust and the founding deed provided for management by the senior most member of the family by turns for life. The plaintiff is the paternal uncle of the first defendant. According to the first defendant the plaintiff having relinquished his right to turn of management, he was entitled to continue to function as a trustee. Since this was denied by the plaintiff, he brought the instant suit for a declaration that he was entitled to his turn of management and for recovery of possession of the office of trustee, the trust properties, and for rendition of accounts.The plaint was presented on 30-9-1958 and the trial was taken up...
R.M. Subramaniam Vs. N. Sundaram Iyer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-13-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Mad217; (1963)IMLJ113
Jagadisan, J.1. This is a creditor's petition for adjudicating the respondent-debtor as an insolvent under the provisions of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act. It is alleged in the petition, that the respondent, who will hereinafter be referred to as the debtor, executed two promissory notes in favour of one RM. Shunmugham of Athikkadu Thekkur,Ramanathapuram Dt. and borrowed two sums of money,Rs. 5000 and Rs. 7500. The first promissory note forRs. 5000 is dated 6-9-1960 and the second promissory note for Rs. 7500 is dated 5-7-1960. The petitioner, who will hereafter be referred as the petitioning creditor,claims to be the assignee of these two promissory notes from RM. Shanmugham for valid consideration. The act of insolvency relied upon by the petitioning creditor is that the property of the debtor remained under attachment in execution of a money decree for 21 days prior to the filing of this petition. Though the petition contains allegations' of other acts of insolvency said to ha...
The Secretary, Press Labour Union Vs. the Management of Express Newspa ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-13-1962
Reported in: (1963)1MLJ146
Anantanarayanan, J.1. This appeal is from the judgment of Balakrishna Iyer, J., in W.P. No. 184 of 1959 directing the issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the order of the Industrial Tribunal, with regard to the reinstatement of four workmen dismissed by the Management of Express Newspapers (Private), Ltd., the proprietors of the Dinamani Press. Since the broad facts of the situation in which the dismissals of these workers took place are not in dispute, we might first set them forth. Actually, eight workers were dismissed by the Management, in the same context of alleged wilful disobedience of orders, and with regard to four of them, the Industrial Tribunal itself held that the dismissals were justified. So far as the present individuals were concerned, the Tribunal held that their dismissals were wrongful and they should be reinstated, with a moiety of the back wages.2. It is admitted that these persons who were thus dismissed were assigned by the Management to the task of what is ...
The Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. K. Srinivasan (Dead) and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-12-1962
Reported in: (1963)1MLJ305
K. Srinivasan, J.1. This is a consolidated reference and a common Statement of the Case has been submitted by the Tribunal under Section 66(1) of the Act. The five assessees whose cases have given rise to the question are directors and shareholders in Kasturi and Sons Private Limited. During the account year ended on 31st of March, 1956, relevant to the assessment year 1956-57, the assessees were employed in various capacities in the company for which they were paid salaries and allowances. These assessees had each what is called a current account in the books of the company. It is common ground that they used to draw from the funds of the company various amounts for their private purposes and also pay into this current: account amounts by way of cash. During the year, the balance was fluctuating either in favour or against the assessees. The company is not one in which the public is substantially interested within the meaning of Section 23-A. In the orders of assessment the Income-tax...
Tiruchi Varthaga Sangam Bank Limited Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, M ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-12-1962
Reported in: [1963]48ITR763(Mad)
SRINIVASAN J. - The assessee is the Tiruchi Varthaga Sangam Bank Ltd. During the year of account relevant to the assessment year 1958-59, the assessee realised a gross income from all sources of Rs. 1,27,688. This included a sum of Rs. 2,550 being interest on securities and a further sum of Rs. 2,500 being the interest on 10 year Treasury Saving Certificates. The bank in the due course of its business paid a sum of Rs. 44,308.88 towards interest on deposits of its customers. It also claimed as expenses allowable under section 10(2) of the Act an amount of Rs. 41,701.44. The quantum of these two amount is not in dispute. But what the Income-tax Officer did was to disallow the proportionate part of the interest on deposit and the expenses attributable to the interest income on the 10 year Treasury Saving Certificates. Such part of the interest payment to depositors on the sum of Rs. 50,000 invested in the purchase of these saving certificates worked out to Rs. 904 and a like proportion o...
Ar. N. Ramaswami Chettiar and Others Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, M ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-12-1962
Reported in: [1963]48ITR771(Mad)
JAGADISAN J. - There was a Hindu undivided family consisting of one Arunachalam Chettiar, his son, Narayanan Chettiar, and his grandsons by Narayanan, namely, Peria Narayanan, Chinna Narayanan and Ramaswami. Narayanan Chettiar, the son of Arunachalam Chettiar, died on 9th June 1946. The family was carrying on money-lending business at Malacca and Tampin under the vilasam of P.AR.N.AR. and also at Tangak under the vilasam N.AR. In the course of these businesses the family acquired rubber estates which comprise rubber trees and coolie lines. The immoveable properties acquired in the course of the money-lending businesses were treated as the stock-in-trade of the respective business in the course of which they came to be acquired. During the recent world war the properties suffered damage due to enemy action and claims were preferred to the Malayan authorities for payment of the compensation payable under the laws and regulations in that territory. The claim was made on 28th April, 1946. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »