Chennai Court April 1963 Judgments
Rakappa Chettiar and anr. Vs. Chockalingam and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-19-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Mad126
Venkataraman, J.1. The defendants are the appellants in this second appeal. The decision of the appeal turns on me question whether Kalyani alias Valliammai, mother of the respondents (plaintiffs), was validly married to Krisnnappa Chattiar. The question arises in this way. The first defendant is the legitimate son of Krishnappa Chettiar. The second defendant is the son of the first defendant. After we death of the first defendant's mother, Krishnappa Chattiar, according to the plaintiffs, married Kalyani alias Valliammai and the plaintiffs were born of that marriage. The marriage is alleged to nave taken place in 1934 Krisnnappa Chettiar died in 1942. After his death the plaintiffs brought the suit claiming a two-third share in Krishnappa Chettiar's properties.2. The main defence of the defendants was that contained in the paragraph 6 of the written statement and was formulates in these words:'Plaintiffs' mother was not married to Krishanppa Chettiar and she was not his second wife. H...
Tag this Judgment!M.S. Chockalinga Chettiar and ors. Vs. Navaneethakrishna Sivasubramani ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-18-1963
Reported in: (1964)1MLJ340
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. These appeals filed under Section 51(1) of the Madras; Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948, raise a question as to-the right of a mortgagee of an estate which had been taken over by the Government under the provisions of the Abolition Act to claim the interim compensation amount deposited by the Government. The appellant had obtained a mortgage decree over the Uthumalai and Surandai estates in Tirunelveli district. These estates were taken over by the Government under the provisions of the Abolition Act-Under the compromise decree, the history of which is'given in the decision, Navaneethakrishnaswami Devasthanam v. Rtikmani & Co. (1955) 2 M.L.J. 339 the appellant was entitled after payment of certain others to enforce his mortgage decree for payment of his dues.. The estates were notified and taken over under the provisions of the Madras Estates-Abolition Act on 3rd January, 1951. Advance compensation which was deposited by the Governm...
Tag this Judgment!Seshi Ammal and anr. Vs. Thaiyu Ammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Mad217
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. The short question for determination in this appeal is whether a Hindu wife who had agreed to receive maintenance at a particular rate, binding herself not to claim a higher rate even if the circumstances were to change, could maintain a suit for increase of maintenance under Section 25 of Act. 78 of 1956. The respondent is the widow of one Rama Aiyar, who took to a second wife, and later, adopted a son. In O.S. No. 329 of 1924 on the file of the District Munsif, Tiruyarur, the respondent sued for maintenance from her husband. There was a compromise of that suit, by which the defendants therein agreed to pay her a sum of Rs. 85 per year; it was also stipulated that the respondent had no right to ask for anything more. A decree was passed in terms of the compromise, which charged certain properties for the due performance of the maintenance. After the passing of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, the respondent came forward with a claim that the ma...
Tag this Judgment!A. Thiruvengadaswami Iyengar Vs. the State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-1963
Reported in: [1963]14STC856(Mad)
Venkatadri, J.1. This is a revision against the order passed by the Tribunal holding that the assessee is liable to pay tax under the Central Sales Tax Act in respect of his inter-State sales for the year 1957-58.2. The assessee is a paddy and rice merchant carrying on business at Mannargudi. He registered himself as a dealer under the Central Sales Tax Act. He submitted his return in Form 1 for the year 1957-58 and the Commercial Tax Officer accepted the same and determined the tax turnover at Rs. 5,24,457-36 and directed him to pay tax on that amount. He paid the tax. Subsequently after the close of the year in September, 1958, he filed an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner stating that he was not liable to pay any tax and that he was entitled to a refund of the tax as it was paid under a mistake of law. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner found that in pursuance of the contracts the assessee despatched goods to Kerala and that therefore it was an inter-State sale as...
Tag this Judgment!S. Bakthavatsalu Vs. the State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-1963
Reported in: [1963]14STC832(Mad)
Srinivasan, J.1. During the year 1958-59, the assessee supplied blue granite jelly (building or road material) to the Neyveli Lignite Corporation. The value thereof was computed at Rs. 2,06,195. The inclusion of this amount in the other turnover of the assessee as a dealer in hardware was objected to on the ground that he had quarried the jelly in his own lands and the supply thereof to the Lignite Corporation did not involve a sale but was in the execution of a works contract which he had entered into. This contention was rejected, it being held that the contract which the assessee had with the Corporation called for the supply of material and was not a works contract.2. In the appeal against this assessment before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the case of the assessee was advanced on the basis that the contract called for the performance of certain services by the assessee, that is to say, the quarrying and the conveyance of the material, that there was no supply of material ...
Tag this Judgment!Mettur Chemical and Industrial Corporation and anr. Vs. the Commercial ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-1963
Reported in: [1964]15STC734(Mad)
ORDERVeeraswami, J.1. Both the petitioners claim to be manufacturers of vanaspati in Madras State. In addition, the petitioner in W. P. No. 445 of 1961 manufactures soaps. On the sales of vanaspati and soaps assessments have been made to sales tax at the prescribed rate. The validity of these assessments is not in question. It is stated that groundnut oil is a component part of vanaspati or soap. Section 3(2) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959, provides for tax at a single point in relation to all goods mentioned in the First Schedule. Further concession in the rate of tax is provided by Sub-section (3) in respect of those goods in the first schedule provided the sale thereof by the dealer to another is for use by the latter as component part of any other goods mentioned in that schedule. Sub-section (3) reads :-Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-section (1) or Sub-section (2), the tax payable by a dealer in respect of any sale of goods mentioned in the First Schedule by ...
Tag this Judgment!Blue MountaIn Estates and Industries Ltd. and Others Vs. Government of ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-1963
Reported in: [1964]54ITR46(Mad)
SRINIVASAN J. - The assessees are coffee estates. They maintain their accounts on the mercantile basis. For the year ending 31st March, 1959, assessments to agricultural income-tax were made. Appeals were taken to the Appellant Assistant Commissioner before whom among other objections it was contended that the assessments of the assessees income on the mercantile basis had been improperly made. It was also pointed out that if the mercantile basis was adopted, the department should have made allowance for the difference between the closing stock of coffee or tea on hand and the opening stock, which was however not done. It was further pointed out that during all the previous years, though the assessees had been maintaining the accounts on the mercantile system, the assessment were made only on the cash basis, that is to say, on the receipts. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner held that the system of accounting which was regularly adopted by the assessees should be accepted and that th...
Tag this Judgment!C.K. Palanivelu Chetty and Sons Vs. the Deputy Commissioner of Commerc ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-15-1963
Reported in: [1963]14STC656(Mad)
ORDERVeeraswami, J.1. Pending a revision petition filed by the petitioner before the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Madras Division, he seems to have applied for stay of collection of the provisional tax for the year 1962-63. The Deputy Commissioner refused to grant stay in the following terms :The request of the petitioner to stay collection of the provisional tax for 1962-63 until the disposal of the revision petition cannot be complied with.2. The power to grant stay is contained in the proviso to Sub-section (4) of Section 33 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959. That proviso reads Provided that the Deputy Commissioner may in his discretion, give such directions as he thinks fit, in regard to the payment of such tax, fee or other amount, if the applicant furnishes sufficient security to his satisfaction in such form and in such manner as may be prescribed.3. It is obvious that the power given by this proviso is for exercise and not for arbitrary refusal. No doubt, th...
Tag this Judgment!R. Kaliappan Vs. the State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-15-1963
Reported in: [1963]14STC750(Mad)
Srinivasan, J.1. The assessee returned a turnover of Rs. 21,041-62 nP. The turnover was computed by the assessing authority at Rs. 24,598-05 nP. He appealed and claimed relief in respect of a turnover of Rs. 3,556, that is to say, the amount added by the assessing authority. His contention was however negatived. There was a further appeal to the Tribunal before whom for the first time it was claimed that the assessee should be assessed under Section 7 of the Act. This section provides for compounded rates of tax in the case of certain assessees whose turnover exceeds Rs. 10,000 but falls short of Rs. 50,000 during the year. The Tribunal rejected this contention holding that Section 7 would not apply to the case of this assessee. It is this order of the Tribunal the correctness of which is canvassed in the present tax revision case.2. It is not disputed that the assessee is a dealer registered under the appropriate section of the Central Sales Tax Act. Section 5 of the Madras General Sa...
Tag this Judgment!State of Madras, Represented by Deputy Commercial Tax Officer Vs. Madu ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-11-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Mad494; [1964]15STC207(Mad)
Jagadisan, J.1. This is a petition by the State of Madras, for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of India from the judgment of this Court in T. C. No. 162 of 1958. Leave is asked for under Article 133 of the Constitution of India. The respondent, the Madura Mills Co., Ltd., opposed the application, and raised a preliminary objection that the application is not maintainable under Article 133 or Under Sections 109 and 110 C.P.C. as the proceedings which terminated in this Court in the order sought to be appealed from are not civil proceedings. This is the main question which has been argued before us, and if we were to uphold the objection of the respondent, the application will have to be rejected in limine, without going into the question whether the case is a fit one for a necessary certificate under Article 133.2. We shall now briefly set out the facts which gave rise to T. C. 162 of 1958 disposed of by us on 13-9-1961. The Madura Mills Co. Ltd., the respondent, is a limited compa...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »