Chennai Court October 1963 Judgments
N. Sathianathan Vs. B.K.P.M. Amaravathi Ammal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-30-1963
Reported in: AIR1965Mad308
Ramakrishnan, J.(1) The principal appeal out of which this batch are connected, is W. A. No. 222 of 1962, and it arises form W. P. No. 1168 of 1959 filed before this court by Sri Balasubramania Bus Service (P) Ltd., Tiruvannamlai. the circumstances under which these writ appeals are filed are briefly, the following:(2) For the route Hosur to Tiruvannamalai, a distance of about 99 miles, the Regional Transport Authority, Salem, invited applications for the stage carriage permits. After considering the claims of the various applicants, the Regional Transport Authority granted the two permits to S. B. Sri Ranga Vilas (P) Ltd., and to Sri B. K. Periamunuswami Gounder respectively. There were number of appeals filed by the disappointed applicants of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal m Madras. The State Transport Appellate Tribunal confirmed the grant of one permit to S. B. Sri Ranga Vilas (P) Ltd., but set aside the grant of the other permit to Sr. B. K. Periamunuswami Gounder, and all...
Tag this Judgment!A. Venkatachala Udayar Vs. S.V. Kasi Pandaram and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-30-1963
Reported in: (1964)1MLJ261
ORDERT. Venkatadri, J.1. The Revision Petition is against the order passed by the learned District Judge, Salem, in adjudicating the 1st respondent as insolvent on his own petition alleging that he was not in a position to pay the debts of all the creditors including the petitioner herein. The learned District Munsif in the first instance dismissed the petition on the ground that the respondent had not proved his inability to discharge the debts incurred by him. The learned District Judge reversed the decision and gave a finding that the 1st respondent has got a prima facie case to adjudicate himself as an insolvent and allowed the petition filed by the respondents It is against the order the petitioner, one of the creditors, has filed the present Civil Revision Petition.2. The only point that arises for my consideration is whether the order passed by the learned District Judge is correct or not as per Section 24 of the Provincial Insolvency Act. Section 24 of the Act merely says that ...
Tag this Judgment!Management of Vijayakumar Mills Ltd. Vs. Secretary, Vijayakumar Mills ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-29-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Mad395; [1965(10)FLR287]
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. Kumaraswami, employed as a time-keeper in the Vijayakumar Mills Ltd., Palani, was dismissed by the management on 29-3-1958 as a result of an enquiry into his alleged misconduct. The propriety of the order of dismissal subsequently formed the subject-matter of an industrial dispute and was referred by the State Government for determination by the Labour Court, Madurai. The jurisdiction of that Court to enter upon that reference was contested by the management, on the ground that the Vijayakumar Mills National. Workers Union which sponsored the dispute was not competent to do so, as Kumaraswami was only a member of the staff and had no community of interest with the industrial workers employed by the management. It is conceded, though nothing turns upon such a concession, that Kumaraswami, was a member of that Union.The Labour Court was of the opinion that the grievance of the dismissed employee a member of the staff, could not be taken up by the Union which r...
Tag this Judgment!B. Rajagopal Naidu Vs. the State Transport Appellate Tribunal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-29-1963
Reported in: (1964)1MLJ92
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. This is an appeal from the Judgment of Srinivasan, J. rejecting an application taken out by the appellant, B. Rajagopal Naidu, under Article 226 of the Constitution, to quash the order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, which superseded the grant made by the State Transport Authority and granted one stage carriage permit to each of respondents 2 and 3. The route in question is Madras to Krishnagiri, a distance of 158 miles. There were as many as 118 applicants for permits before the State Transport Authority. That Authority, though not convinced of the utility of the marking system prescribed by G.O. Ms. No. 1298, Home, dated 28th April, 1956, in the matter of selecting the proper person for a long distance route of this character, nevertheless, applied that system for adjudging the comparative merits of the applicants. It found that the appellant was the best qualified operator and it passed an order on 8th May, 1958, granting both the permits to hi...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Doraiswamy Nadar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-29-1963
Reported in: (1964)1MLJ145
M. Anantanarayanan, J.1. The appellant, Doraiswamy Nadar, Was convicted of the murder of his wife, Kaveri Ammal, aged about 30, and sentenced to the lesser penalty of imprisonment for life. The case is a very simple one, with regard to the actual merits. The record makes it clear beyond doubt that, following a violent quarrel between the husband and the wife, the accused beat Kaveri Ammal first with the broom-stick (M.O. 1), then kicked her after she fell down, and, following this, gave her a number of blows with the iron rod (M.O. 2) which happened to be there. This was in the front yard (vasal) of the house. The accused then dragged his wife a few feet, and carried her into the house, and bolted the door from inside. In the morning, he was sitting in front of the house and weeping. The accused frankly confessed to three witnesses, P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3, that his wife died on account of the beating administered by him the previous night, Later, the accused made a judicial confession (Exhib...
Tag this Judgment!M.A. Mohabool Bi Bi Vs. Ambrose
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-29-1963
Reported in: (1964)1MLJ260
T. Venkatadri, J.1. The landlady has filed this petition against the order of dismissal -of her petition for eviction on the ground of arrears of rent and wilful default in payment of the same. The defence to the petition is that the tenant is not in arrears and there is no wilful default on his part. Both the Rent Controller and the appellate authority gave a finding that there was no wilful default on the part of the tenant. Hence the petition and the appeal of the landlady were both dismissed. The present Revision has been filed by the landlady against the dismissal order.2. Originally, the landlady filed an application for owner's occupation. However, both the landlady and the tenant entered into a compromise in and by which the arrears accumulated by that time would be paid in two instalments on two different dates and that the tenant would also vacate the house within a particular period. As the tenant did not pay the rent as undertaken, the landlady filed an application for evic...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Divan Sahib Alias Pythiakkaran Alias Samiyar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-28-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Mad480; 1964CriLJ557
Anantanarayanan, J.1. This is a very unfortunate case. The victim in this criminal appeal is a certain Krishnaveni Ammal, aged about 25, and the wife of one Srinivasan, P. W. 1. The appellant, Diwan Sahib alias Pythiakkaran alias Samiyar, is an exorcist or magician, who was charged with the murder of this Unfortunate young woman, by literally suffocating her to death with smoke, in the course of an attempt to cure her of the evil spirits which, according to the appellant, had possessed her and were proving to be troublesome. The teamed Sessions Judge, Chingleput convicted the appellant Under Section 302, I. P. G. and sentenced him to the lesser penalty of imprisonment for life.2. On the facts themselves, we are unable to see any room for doubt. We have the very clear evidence of the husband, P. W. 1, corroborated by the testimonies of his cousin Kadirvelu P. W. 2, and the mother of the deceased P. W. 3, regarding what happened that night and how the victim met with her death. This is f...
Tag this Judgment!Alangara Udayar Vs. Santhiagu Udayar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-28-1963
Reported in: (1964)1MLJ258
T. Venkatadri, J.1. This Appeal is filed by the defendant in O.S. No. 447 of 1957. The Suit is filed for declaration of title and injunction or, in the alternative for recovery of possession. The suit property belonged to one Arokia Udayar who died in 1930. Arokia Udayar executed a will on 16th September, 1924 (Exhibit A-1). At the time of executing this will, he had his first wife Anna Mari Ammal and four daughters. As per the terms of the will he made a bequest of the entire properties to his wife Anna Mari Ammal, giving a life estate and after her death to the plaintiff and his wife. The reason for giving the absolute estate to this last daughter and her husband was stated in the will in the following words:Since my youngest daughter Annammal and her husband Santhiyagu Odayar are living with me, and looking after my properties and are serving me and my wife Anna Mariyayee to our satisfaction and owing to, our affection towards them, I have provided under this will that they should t...
Tag this Judgment!T. Rajarathnam Chetti Vs. A.A. Abdul Gani and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-28-1963
Reported in: (1963)1MLJ289
ORDERT. Venkatadri, J.1. In these Civil Revision Petitions the interesting question of law that-arises is whether both the House Rent Controller and the Chief Judge of the Court of Small Causes (the appellate authority) having found that the requirement of the landlord is bona fide for the purpose of his business, are justified in allotting only two shops instead of four shops in the premises in question 24, Devaraja Mudali Street, was purchased by the petitioner in the year 1959 for a sum of Rs. 70,000. His son was originally carrying on glass business in partnership with a third party from 1956 to 1960. After the dissolution of the partnership he started a glass-business of his own with the capital furnished by his father. His father filed the present application for eviction of the four tenants from the non-residential portion, of the said premises for the purpose of carrying on his own business. He is not in occupation of any other non-residential building of his own. The Rent Cont...
Tag this Judgment!S.P. Sahul Hamid Vs. P.M. Abdul Majid and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-18-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Mad252
Jagadisan, J.1. This second appeal arises out of proceedings in execution of a mortgage decree. The appellant is a Court auction purchaser in execution of that decree. Respondents 1 to 3 claimed that they were entitled to the eastern half of the property purchased by the appellant. The proceedings commenced as an original suit in the first instance, but was subsequently converted into an application under Section 47 Civil Procedure Code. Respondents 1 to 3 were the plaintiffs and o the appellant was the first defendant. The first Court, the executing Court, dismissed the application, but on appeal by the appellant herein-before the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Tirunelveli, respondents 1 to 3 have been declared entitled to the property claimed by them. Hence this second appeal.2. The facts are as follows: The subject matter of the dispute between the parties is a house within the limits of Malapalayam Panchayat The entire house is described in the application as the first schedule. T...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »