Chennai Court February 1964 Judgments
Murugadass Vs. State of Madras and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-27-1964
Reported in: AIR1964Mad518; (1966)IILLJ8Mad
ORDERSrinivasan, J.1. The petitioner is the village headman of Saravanapakkam village. As a result of certain departmental proceedings against him, he was suspended, from office for six months and this order was confirmed on appeal. The petitioner has approached this court praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari5 to quash the proceedings and his complaint is that there has been no proper enquiry in respect of the charges and that no further opportunity to show cause against the proposed punishment has been given to him and that this failure constitutes a violation of Article 311 of the Constitution.2. It is really unnecessary to set out the averments found in the counter-affidavit, for, on the facts disclosed in the affidavit of the petitioner, it is seen that there is no substance in the complaint. The two charges against the petitioner were that he made certain collections which he delayed to remit to the treasury. In one case the amount collected on 31-5-1959 was not remitted ...
Tag this Judgment!T.V. Ramaswami Chettiar Vs. Regional Transport Officer, Nilgiris and a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-26-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Mad403; (1965)2MLJ358
(1) The petitioner's registration certificate for his car, MDN 4820, was suspended for a period by the registering authority, the appellate authority agreeing with it, on a charge that he plied the car illicitly as a taxi in violation of S. 33(1)(b) of the Motor Vehicles Act. The petitioner seeks to quash the suspension of the certificate on the ground that a copy of the check report of the police officer, which led to framing of the charge and suspension of the certificate, was not furnished to him at any stage.(2) Section 33(1) states that it any registering authority has reason to believe that any motor vehicle within jurisdiction has been used for hire, such authority may, after giving the owner an opportunity of making any representation he may wish to make, for reasons to be recorded in writing, suspend the certificate of registration of the vehicle for a period not exceeding four months. The principal elements of this sub-section are (i) the registering authority should not mere...
Tag this Judgment!NadessIn Vs. Bharathi Mills
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-25-1964
Reported in: AIR1964Mad417
Anantanarayanan, J.1. The facts with regard to this appeal, instituted as a Pourvoision Cassation, by one Nadessin alias Gobalou front the judgment of the Court of the First Instance confirming the judgment of the Labour Court, are as follows. This petitioner Nadessia alias Gobalou, was an employee of the Bharathi Mills (respondent) and ho was duly retired from service upon reaching the age of 60, under the terms governing his employment. Later, he instituted a proceeding before the Labour Court praying that the removal from service be set aside, and that he should either be reinstated for a period of five years, or given arrears of salary etc., for that period, because the retirement was premature and he was aged only about 55 and not 60. There is a counter-affidavit by the Manager of the Bharathi Mills, pointing out that Nadessin alias Gobalou (petitioner) declared, in his claim for provident fund, that he was born in the year 1901, which would make him past 60, on the date of retire...
Tag this Judgment!P. Ansari Doraiswamy Vs. the Union Territory of Pondicherry Administra ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-25-1964
Reported in: AIR1964Mad437
Anantanarayanan, J.1. This writ proceeding is instituted by a certain Ansari Doraiswami (petitioner), praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the Lt. Governor of Pondicherry to approve and finalise his tender, as that of the highest bidder, in a certain auction sale. The circumstances are indisputably established by the affidavit of the Mayor who presided at, and conducted, this auction, namely, the 2nd respondent M. Edourd Goubert we are accepting the averments in this affidavit as the truth of what happened. The circumstances may be briefly set forth as follows:2. In accordance with a sale notification dated; 9-10-1963, a public auction was held for lease of the right to collect parking dues of vehicles in the' city of Pondicherry, for the period 1-1-1964 to 31-12-1964. We have before us both the sale notification, and the separate articles and conditions of lease, termed 'Cashier des Charges'. We shall refer to one vital article of these terms, and some reference will ...
Tag this Judgment!S.V.M. Transport Periakulam Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-19-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Mad471; 1965CriLJ652a
(1) On the ground that the conductor of the petitioner's bus, contrary to Rule 223 of the Motor Vehicles Rules, declined to carry the daughter of a certain passenger, the Secretary of the Regional Transport Authority suspended its permit for a period of seven days with option to compound. The father of the girl made a complaint alleging that he took 11/2 tickets for himself and his daughter who was below 12 years of age, the agent of the bus at the stand was, after seeing his daughter, satisfied that she was under 12 years of age and admitted that half a ticket for her would be sufficient, that, nevertheless, when both of them were travelling in the bus, the conductor, behaving rudely and in an unmannerly fashion, asked them to get down from the bus, stating that the girl must be more than 12 years of age and must have a full ticket. The Secretary, the Regional Transport Authority, was not prepared to accept the explanation of the petitioner as it considered that "the girl does not loo...
Tag this Judgment!M.V. Sundara Uddayar, Vs. Secretary to Government, Department of Indus ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-19-1964
Reported in: AIR1967Mad181
ORDER(1) The Vallam Co-operative Loan and Sales Society was directed to be dissolved by order of the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies dated 18-6-1960. The petitioner is the President of the Society, and he filed an appeal to the State Government as provided under S. 44(2) of the Co-operative Societies Act. This appeal was rejected by the Government, as having been filed beyond the period of limitation. The petitioner sought to have a review of that order contending that the order having been served upon him only on 10-12-1960, this appeal was within time. The petition was also rejected. The present petition under Art, 226 of the Constitution has been filed by the petitioner seeking the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the order impugned. It is contended that, though S. 44(2) specifies that the appeal should be filed within two months from the date of the order sought to be appealed from, the true position in law is that the period of two months has to be computed from th...
Tag this Judgment!V.C.K. Bus Service (P) Ltd., Coimbatore and anr. Vs. H.B. Sethna and o ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-18-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Mad149; (1965)1MLJ203
ORDER(1) These petitions, which ask for a rule or prohibition restraining the second respondent, the Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal, Coimbatore from proceeding with the enquiry into certain claims preferred by the first respondent in each of these petitions, raise a point of jurisdiction of that Tribunal. The motor accident occurred on 6-1-1961, in which the bus belonging to the first of the petitioners and a motor car owned by the first respondent in one of these petitions were involved. The accident resulted in personal injuries to the claimants before the Tribunal. Section 110(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 provides for a constitution by the Government, by notification in the Official Gazette of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunals, for specified areas, for adjudicating upon claims for compensation, in respect of accidents involving death or bodily injury to persons arising out of the use of motor vehicles. By a notification dated 12-7-1961, the District and Sessions Judge...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: S. Rengaswamy and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-14-1964
Reported in: AIR1964Mad435
ORDERKunhamed Kutti, J.1. The nine petitioners in this revision case are accused 1 to 9 in C.C. 25 of 1961 On the file of the Additional First Class Magistrate, Virudhunagar. They were charge-sheeted before the Sub Magistrate, Virudhunagar, for offences punishable Under Sections 147, 426 and 447, Indian Penal Code. But after recording the evidence of P. W. 1, the Sub Magistrate found that an offence Under Section 148, Indian Penal Code had also been disclosed against them. He, there-, fore, submitted the records, Under Section 346, Cri. P. C. to the District Magistrate who, in turn, transferred the case to the Additional first Class Magistrate, Virudhunagar. The latter took the case on file; but he found that, since the first accused was the president of the Panchayat Board, the prosecution was not maintainable in the absence of sanction Under Section 106 of the Madras Village Panchayats Act, X of 1950. On this finding he struck out the charges framed by the Sub Magistrate and discharg...
Tag this Judgment!Sambandam Pillai and ors. Vs. Ramaswami Naidu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-14-1964
Reported in: AIR1964Mad547
Venkatadri, J.1. This appeal arises out of execution proceedings in O S No. 31 of 1945. on the file of the Sub Court, Cuddalore The 6th defendant in the suit is the first appellant herein He and his son filed an application, E A No 700 of 1960 out of which this appeal arises, for directing the decree-holder in O.S. No 31 of 1945, to sell items 1 to 15 and 17 to 25 of the decree first in execution and to sell item 16 afterwards When this application came up before the learned Subordinate fudge Cuddalore, he allowed the application, subject to the condition, namely, that item 16 would be sold in the order in which it was found in the decree seriatim The assignee decree holder filed an appeal against the said direction to the District Judge. Cuddalore. He held that the assignee decree-holder had a right to proceed only against item 16 which belonged to Sambandam Pillai, the 6th defendant, the original mortgagor, and thus set aside the order of the learned Subordinate Fudge The assignee de...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: P. Ramarathnam
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-14-1964
Reported in: 1965CriLJ285
ORDERKailasam, J.1. The VII Presidency Magistrate found that the petitioner printed the obscene picture on 12-7-1962 and that the publication is grossly indecent, convicted him under Section 292-A I. P. C. and sentenced him to a fine of Rs. 200 in default R. I. for three months.2. Mr. G. Gopalaswami, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the conviction cannot be sustained on the ground that the prosecution has not established that the petitioner had the necessary mens rea for constituting an offence under Section 292-A I. P. C. Learned Counsel contended that, before a person could be convicted for printing a grossly indecent or scurrilous matter, the prosecution must prove that be Intended to print that grossly indecent or scurrilous matter. In support of his contention, he relied on Explanation II to the section where it is provided that, in deciding whether a person has committed an offence under this station, the court shall have regard to any evidence offered or called...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »