Chennai Court September 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.
Ramachandran Vs. A.N. Krishnamoorthy Iyer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-06-1963
Reported in: (1964)1MLJ153
K.S. Ramamurthi, J.1. This is an appeal against the Order of the Estates Abolition Tribunal. The respondents had purchased three-fourths interest in the life estate-belonging to one Rajagopala Pandarathar the Zamindar of Pudukudi village. The Government had deposited a sum of Rs. 2,614-67 representing the interim payments for Fasli 1360 to Fasli 1366 both inclusive. The respondent filed the application under Section 50 of the Estates Abolition Act, Madras Act XXVI of 1948, herein referred to as the Act for payment out to him the sum of Rs. 1961 representing three-fourths of Rs. 2614-67, the amount deposited by the Government. Rajagopala Pandarathar and his son Ramachandran Pandarathar were impleaded as respondents 1 and 2 to the petition. The Tribunal took the view that the interim payments by the Government represented the income of the Zamindar and as the respondent had purchased the life interest he was entitled to the entire income. Rajagopala Pandarathar died during the pendency o...
Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd. and ors. Vs. K.S. Naravana Iyer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-05-1963
Reported in: AIR1965Mad122
(1) This civil revision petition arises out of a decree passed by the learned subordinate Judge, Cuddalore, under S. 9 of the Specific Relief Act directing restoration of possession of the property that forms the subject matter of this litigation to the respondent. The property belongs to the Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd. and is situate within the mining area. It was leased out in the years 1955 to the respondent for a year, for running a canteen. the lease was renewed thereafter every year till 31-12-1961. The Corporation then appears to have decided that a canteen within the mining area should be run only by a co-operative society for the benefit of the employees of the Corporation, and it, therefore, declined to extend the lease in favour of the respondent any further.(2) But the respondent was not prepared to reconcile himself with the termination of his agreement. He made efforts to have the lease for a further period of five years and failing in his efforts, he applied for ex...
K.K. Shaik Dawood Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-04-1963
Reported in: 1965CriLJ560
Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. S.S. State of Madras' arrived at the Madras Harbour on 16.4.1958, with passengers from Fenang. One Nagoor Meera, who arrived by that steamer brought with him a Raleigh cycle as his personal baggage. The Customs authorities had evidently some reason to suspect that the cycle contained prohibited goods and on closer examination, the sterns of the rear forks of the cycle were found to contain 397 gold pellets weighing 126-43 tolas. Nagoor Meera gave a statement before the authorities that the cycle was sent by one Sikkander of Penang with instructions to hand it over to Shaik Dawood, the appellant before us.2. Import of gold has been prohibited by a notification under Section 23 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act 1947. The appellant did not dispute that he was concerned with the illegal importation of the goods concealed in the cycle. After giving a reasonable opportunity to the appellant, the Collector of Customs, by his order, dated 4.2.1959, confiscated the...
Minor Ramalingam, Represented by His Maternal Uncle, Swaminatha Odayar ... Overruled
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-03-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Mad320
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. This second appeal raises a question of some importance as to the construction of Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (which we shall sometimes refer to also as the Act). The facts giving rise to this litigation are not now in dispute. One Somasundara Udayar, a resident of Poongavur village in Thanjavore District, died sometime, before the year 1937, leaving him surviving his widow, Sellathachi and two daughters, Kuppammal and Punithavalli Ammal, the last of them being the first respondent to this appeal. The properties left by Somasundara were inherited by his widow and were in her possession on the date when the Act came into force. Punithavalli Ammal was a disappointment to her mother, she having left her husband in the year 1947 to live with her paramour. Disputes even arose between them and Sellathachi bad to file a suit in the year 1948 and that successfully to restrain her daughter and her paramour from interfering with the properties in h...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›