Chennai Court November 1963 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.
E.K. Raghava Reddy Vs. Official Assignee and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-12-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Mad549
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. These appeals, filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent from the judgment of Kailasam J. involve, inter alia, the following question, which has given rise to this reference'Whether mere knowledge on the part of a purchaser in an execution sale about the admission of a petition to adjudicate the judgment-debtor insolvent, will render his purchase in court auction as one not made in good faith, and thereby deny him the protection afforded by Section 53(3) of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, which corresponds to Section 51(3) of the Provincial Insolvency Act?'By his judgment, the learned Judge set aside, on the application of the Official Assignee under S 7 of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act (which will hereafter be referred to as the Act), certain sales conducted by the District Munsifs court, Poonamallee, in execution of decrees obtained against one Ramalinga Reddi. E. K. Raghava Reddi, the appellant in O S A. 16 of 1963. is the purchaser in those ...
V.K. Balakrishnan Naidu Vs. the State of Madras Represented by the Sec ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-12-1963
Reported in: (1964)ILLJ272Mad; (1964)1MLJ226
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. This appeal from the Judgment of Jagadisan, J., raises an important question as to the scope of disciplinary proceedings initiated by the Government against their servants The appellant was employed since the year 1942 as a Lower Division clerk and later as an inspector under the Hindu Religious Endowments Board. On 30th September, 1951 by reason of the provisions of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951, the Board was abolished and the control of the endowments, religious and charitable, was taken over by the Government. Under Section 104 of that enactment, such members of the Board as the Government might consider suitable may be appointed by the Government in their discretion to any offices provided for in the Act to which they may be deemed qualified. Sub-clause (2) of the section states that the conditions of the service of persons so appointed shall be regulated by rules made by the Government from time to time as if they had e...
The Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ari. Athi. V. Ramachandra Chettiar, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-12-1963
Reported in: (1964)1MLJ281
G.R. Jagadisan, J.1. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras, the Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question to this Court, under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act:Whether in the circumstances and on the facts of the case, capital gains of Rs. 7,269 on the sale of shares computed by the Income-tax Officer is not correct and in accordance with the law?2. The facts are these. The assessee is a Hindu undivided family. He is not a dealer in shares. He is deriving income from interest on securities, property, business and dividends from shares held in limited companies. The assessee held shares in a bank called the Karur Vysia Bank, Ltd. In the year 1957, the bank issued bonus shares to the assessee in proportion to the shares already held by him in the bank. During the year of account ended 13th April, 1959, relevant to the assessment year 1959-60, the assessee sold 94 bonus shares for Rs. 7,268-94 nP. The Income-tax Officer was of the opinion that th...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras Vs. Athi V. Ramachandra Chettiar.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-12-1963
Reported in: [1964]52ITR96(Mad)
JAGADISAN J. - At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras, the Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question to this court under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Ac :'Whether, in the circumstances and on the facts of the case, capital gains of Rs. 7,269 on the sale of shares computed by the Income-tax Officer is not correct and in accordance with the law?'The facts are thes : The assessee is a Hindu undivided family. He is not a dealer in shares. He is deriving income from interest on securities, property, business and dividends from shares held in limited companies. The assessee held shares in a bank called the Karur Vysia Bank Limited. In the year 1957, the bank issued bonus shares to the assessee in proportion to the shares already held by him in the bank. During the year of account ended 13th April, 1959, relevant to the assessment year 1959-60, the assessee sold 94 bonus shares for Rs. 7,268.94 nP. The Income-tax Officer was of the opinion that the or...
N. Venkatarama Iyer Vs. Abdul Karim and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-08-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Mad365
Anantanarayanan, J.1. The second appeal is instituted by one N. Venkatarama Iyer, the plaintiff in the courts below, in a suit for partition and separate possession of his alleged fourth share in the suit properties. Admittedly, the properties, belonged to the co-sharers of a Muslim family, and the plaintiff (appellant) sued as a transferee or assignee for value of the rights of two of those sharers, under circumstances, that are not without some degree of interest. The facts are as follows. The properties originally belonged to one Kamal Sahib who died in 1933. He left surviving him his widow Mariam Bi, two daughters Hajra Bi and Murad Bi and a son Abdul Kariam alias Nur Pasha who is the contesting respondent. Mariam Bi died on 11-1-1944. Prior to her death, she instituted a suit O. S. No. 453 of 1943 for partition along with her two daughters against her son Abdul Karim, (the first respondent).2. After the death of Mariam Bi, her two daughters were recorded as her legal representativ...
R. Balasubramanian Vs. N. Krishnammal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-08-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Mad423
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. This is an application for grant of leave to appeal under Article 133 of the Constitution The judgment of this Court is not one of affirmance of that given by the learned Fudge sitting on the Original Side of this Court It is admitted that the subject-matter in controversy satisfies the requirement of Article 133(1)(a) and (b) But the point taken before us against the grant of leave is that as the jurisdiction of this Court to pronounce upon the construction of the settlement deed was more or less in the nature of an advisory one our judgment could not be regarded as a judgment or final order within the terms , of Article 133. No authority is however shown in support of the contention. Under Order XIII of the Original Side Rules it will be open to any person claiming to be interested either as a devisee, legatee, heir or legal representative, or a cestuique trustee under the trusts of any deed or instrument:, to apply to the Court for determination without a...
A.D. Jayaveerapandia Nadar Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-08-1963
Reported in: (1964)1MLJ201
K. Srinivasan, J.1. The following question stands referred to us:Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was material for the Tribunal to hold that the sum of Rs. 21,500 which the assessee claimed he had borrowed from Murugesam Pillai and Krishnamurthi of Karaikkal represent income assessable under the head 'Other Sources, and as income from undisclosed sources 2. The assessee carried on the business of clearing and forwarding agency at Nagapattinam. For the assessment year 1956-57, he returned a net income of Rs. 1,993 and that was accepted in so far as his business income was concerned. But, on a scrutiny of the accounts, the Income-tax Officer found various deposits and withdrawals in the name of one Murugesam Pillai and one Krishnamurthi of Karaikkal. In support of his claim that they were merely borrowings and repayments, the assessee filed letters from the two persons referred to. The Income-tax Officer separately corresponded with these parties and they ...
N. Venkatarama Iyer Vs. Abdul Karim Alias Nurpasha and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-08-1963
Reported in: (1964)1MLJ268
M. Anantanarayanan, J.1. The Second Appeal is instituted by one N. Venkatarama Iyer, the plaintiff in the Courts below, in a suit for partition and separate possession of his alleged fourth share in the suit properties. Admittedly, the properties belonged to the co-sharers of a Muslim family, and the plaintiff (appellant) sued as a transferee or assignee for value of the rights of two of those sharers, under circumstances that are not without some degree of interest. The facts are as follows. The properties originally belonged to one Kamal Sahib who died in 1933. He left surviving him his widow Mariam Bi, two daughters Hajrm Bi and Murad Bi and a son Abdul Karim alias Nur Pasha who are contesting respondents. Mariam Bi died on 11th January, 1944. Prior to her death, she instituted a suit O.S. No. 453 of 1945 for partition along with her two daughters against her son Abdul Karim (1st respondent).2. After the death of Mariam Bi, her two daughters were recorded as her legal representative...
A. D. Jayaveerapandia Nadar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-08-1963
Reported in: [1964]54ITR401(Mad)
SRINIVASAN J. - The following question stands referred to us :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was material for the Tribunal to hold that the sum of Rs. 21,500 which the assessee claimed he had borrowed from Murugesam Pillai and Krishnamurthi of Karaikal represent income assessable under the head 'other sources' and as income from undisclosed soruces ?'The assessee carried on the business of clearing and forwarding agency at Nagapattinam. For the assessment year 1956-57, he returned a net income of Rs. 1,993 and that was accepted in so far as his business income was concerned. But, on a scrutiny of the accounts, the Income-tax Officer found various deposits and withdrawals in the name of one Murugesam Pillai and one Krishnamurthi of Karaikal. In support of his claim that they were merely borrowings and repayment, the assessee filed letters from the two persons referred to. The Income-tax Officer separately corresponded with these parties and they wrote ...
East India Industries (Madras) Private Limited Vs. Regional Provident ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-07-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Mad371
Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment of Veeraswami J. upholding in part the demand made by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner upon the appellant for payment of the employer's contribution for the period from 1-3-1954 to 31-3-1958, in. accordance with the scheme framed under the Employees' Provident Funds Act of 1952.2. The appellant is a private limited company running a factory for the manufacture of water-proof packing paper and tarpaulin. The process adopted in manufacturing the first article is described to be to smear with tar a sheet of paper and then' superimpose another like sheet and press them together. The product, it is claimed, has the qualities of a water-proof paper with the advantage of flexibility. The other product, tarpaulin, is manufactured by treating jute gunnies with tar. According to the appellant the number of workers in the factory did not exceed fifty except on one day in each year during the relevant period. The Regional Provide...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »