Chennai Court January 1964 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.
Cement Distributors Private Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-22-1964
Reported in: [1966]60ITR586(Mad)
SRINIVASAN J. - The assessee, Messrs. Cement Distributors Private Limited, disclosed the total profits for the account year ended 31st of October, 1953, relevant to the assessment year 1954-55 as Rs. 2,10,941. The directors declared a dividend of Rs. 81,150. At the time of assessment, however, the Income-tax Officer determined the income to be Rs. 3,91,143. This increase was due to the disallowance of a claim to an alleged trading loss of Rs. 2,12,691. This loss was held to be not genuine. Against this disallowance there was an appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and a further appeal to the Tribunal both of whom held that he transaction leading to be alleged loss were unreal and had been recorded with an ulterior motive. An application to make a reference under section 66(1) of the Act was dismissed. When the matter came before this court under section 66(2) of the Act, this court to be served that the transactions had been founds to be bogus ones and, consequently, the loss...
The Executive Engineer (Construction), Madras Vs. T.L. Thyagarajan and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-17-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Mad372; [1965(10)FLR72]; (1965)1MLJ64
(1) This appeal arises out of proceedings before the Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation Madras. The appellant here in is the Executive Engineer (Construction), West Division, Department of Industries and Commerce. He opposed the application filed by the respondents in respect of the death of one T. Tukaram, as a result of personal injury by an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment on 14-5-1959 under the Executive Engineer.(2) The deceased Tukaram was employed as Works Inspector by the Department of Industries and Commerce in connection with the construction of a building at Salem for handloom mill parts. On the fatal day the Assistant Engineer, who was in charge of the spot and acting under the directions of the Executive Engineer, asked the deceased to go over to the office and prepare a site plan indicating the position of various main and sub-works to be constructed in the building. In pursuance of the directions given by the Assistant Engineer ...
Saraswathi and anr. Vs. Krishnier
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-16-1964
Reported in: AIR1964Mad501
Ramamurti, J.1. This civil miscellaneous appeal arises out of certain proceedings initiated by the respondent (petitioning creditor) in I. P. No. 4 of 1958 for a declaration that certain properties 'formed part of the estate of the insolvent, and that the Official Receiver should be directed to take possession of the same. The petitioning creditor's case was that the insolvent had put certain properties fictitiously in the names of his wife and mother the appellants herein, that they were not genuine transactions, and that the properties put in their names still continued to form part of the insolvent's estate. The appellants resisted the same, claiming title in themselves.2. The learned Subordinate judge., Nagarcoli. dismissed the application, but on appeal the learned District Judge modified the order of the trial court, and upheld the claim of the petitioning creditor in respect of a portion of the properties. The appellants aggrieved by that portion of the learned. District Judge's...
The Daily Calendar Supplying Bureau, Sivakasi Vs. the United Concern
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-16-1964
Reported in: AIR1967Mad381
1. This appeal is filed under the Letters Patent against the judgment of Kunhamed Kutti J., in Civil Suit No 84 of 1958, by the first defendant. The suit was filed by the plaintiff seeking certain reliefs consequent upon the alleged infringement of copyright under Section 62 of the Copyright Act (Act XIV of 1957). The plaintiff, a firm called the United Concern represented by its partner, S. Muthuswami, alleged that in the year 1947, it had contacted one T. M. Subramaniam, an artist, P. W 2 in the case, and got him to execute an oil painting of Lord Subramania in the posture of Kumaraguruparan. After getting this picture painted, the plaintiff acquired from the artist, all the rights in the picture for valuable consideration. Then in 1948, the plaintiff got the painting printed by the off-set process with the help of the well-known firm Associated Printers in Madras and copies of the picture thus printed were widely sold. There were reprints in 1933 and again in 1956. One of the copies...
C. Lakshmana Iyer Vs. Pubbi Setti Sethamma and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-15-1964
Reported in: (1964)1MLJ362
ORDERP. Kunhamed Kutti, J.1. This is a Petition filed by the petitioner in Crl. R.C. No. 1506 of 1962 on the file of this Court, under Sections 439 and 561-A of the Criminal Procedure Code for the Court, under Section 439 and 561-A of the Criminal Procedure Code for restoration to file of the said Crl. R.C. No. 1506 of 1962 dismissed by me on 12th November, 19632. That was Revision Case filed by the petitioner against the order of the learned Third Presidency, Magistrate; Saidapet, discharging the accused in a complaint filed by the petitioner under Sections 352, 448, 457, 427, 380, 506 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Magistrate examined in the case six witnesses and marked eight documents on the side of the petitioner and two documents on the side of the accused and came to the conclusion that sufficient material had not been furnished before him to justify a charge in respect of any of the offences against the accused. Against that order, the petitioner filed a Revisi...
In Re: Ramaswamy Nadar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-15-1964
Reported in: 1965CriLJ366
Ramamurti, J.1. The condemned prisoner in the referred trial who is appellant in C. A. 860 of 1963 (hereinafter referred to as appellant) has been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Salem Division, for the offence of murder and sentenced to death under Section 302 I. P. C. for having murdered his wife Muthayee by stabbing her with a knife at 9-30 a.m. on 19-4-1963, while she was going to Singalandapuram from Palanimoopanur. In the Sessions court, including the appellant, five persons were charged and tried for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 302 and 302 read with Section 149 1. P. C. Accused 1 to 4 are brothers and the 5th accused is the son of the second accused. All of them are residents of Palanimoopanur. The case for the prosecution that the other accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and assisted the appellant in committing the offence, was not accepted by the learned Sessions Judge and they were acquitted by him. We are, therefore, concerned on...
E.M. Forster and anr. Vs. A.N. Parasuram
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-09-1964
Reported in: AIR1964Mad331
Anantanarayanan, J.1. In 1924, Mr. E. M. Forster, the English Novelist, published 'A Passage to India', a work of fiction which was also a penetrating study of the Indo-Anglian social climate; the work since became famous, and has recently been dramatised. Certain exclusive rights of publication in this work were assigned by Mr. Forster to Edward Arnold (Publishers) Ltd., by an indenture of Agreement in March 1924. In 1955-56, 'the University of Madras prescribed 'ft Passage to India', as a text book for the students taking the B. A. degree. Mr. A. N. Parasuram (respondent) published a guide-book for students to the novel 'A passage to India' in or about December 1954. Two actions were instituted in the Original Civil Jurisdiction of this Court, respectively by Mr. A. N. Parasuraman, respondent, on the one hand, and Mr. E. M. Forster and Messrs. Edward Arnold (Publishers) Ltd. on the other, both relating to the alleged infringement of the copyright in the original work by the publicati...
Km. N. N. S. N. Subramanian Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-09-1964
Reported in: [1965]55ITR610(Mad)
The judgment of the court was delivered byRAMACHANDRA IYER C.J. - The question referred for decision, namely, 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was material to support the finding of the Tribunal that the sum of Rs. 52,500 was the income of the assessee from undisclosed sources in the year of account ?' relates to the assessment for the year 1947-48 of a Hindu undivided family, its then karta being one Nachiappa Chettiar. The relevant accounting period was the year ending with April 4, 1947. Nachiappa and his adoptive father, Swaminathan Chettiar, originally constituted a Hindu coparcenary. There was a partition between them on January 20, 1940, with the result the Nachiappa and his sons constituted another undivided family. The assessment in question concerns Nachiappas family. Subsequently, on June 11, 1948, both Swaminathan and Nachiappa reunited; the former did not survive the re-union very long. But the re-union has no relevance to the present case...
N.K.T. Sivalingam Chettiar Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-09-1964
Reported in: (1964)1MLJ421
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. The assessee, who had left India about the year 1938 for Malaya, carried on business there for about eight years. He returned to this country on 21st March, 1946, bringing with him a sum of Rs. 16,000. That sum, according to him, formed part of the profits earned by him in the past in his business at Malaya. In the accounts of one K.V.RM. Ramanathan Chettiar at Bombay there was a deposit in assessee's name as on 13th April, 1946. The sum deposited was Rs. 10,000. The Income-tax Officer, who enquired into the matter of the assessment, was told that that sum of Rs. 10,000 invested with Ramanathan Chettiar was part of the larger sum of Rs. 16,000 which he brought from Malaya. The Officer did not accept that version. He treated the entire sum of Rs. 16,000 admitted by the assessee to have been brought from Malaya, as undisclosed business profits and included that sum in the income of the assessee for the assessment year 1947-48, the relevant year of account havi...
E.M. Forster and ors. Vs. A.N. Parasuram
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-09-1964
Reported in: (1964)1MLJ431
M. Anantanarayanan, J.1. In 1924 Mr. E.M. Forster, the English Novelist, published ' A Passage to India ', a work of fiction which was also a penetrating study of the Indo-Anglican social climate ; the work since became famous, and has recently been dramatised. Certain exclusive rights of publication in this work were assigned by Mr. Forster to Edward Arnold (Publishers), Limited, by an Indenture of Agreement, in March, 1924. In 1955-56, the University of Madras prescribed ' A Passage to India ', as a text-book for the students taking the B.A. Degree. Mr. A.N. Parasuram (respondent) published a Guide-book for students to the novel ' A Passage to India', in or about December, 1954. Two actions were instituted in the Original Civil Jurisdiction of this Court, respectively by Mr. A.N. Parasuram (respondent) on the one hand, and Mr. E.M. Forster and Messrs. Edward Arnold (Publishers), Limited on the other, both relating to the alleged infringement of the copyright in the original work by t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »