Chennai Court March 1964 Judgments
The Associated Cement Companies Ltd. Vs. L.S. Ramakrishna Gowder
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-31-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Mad318
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J. (1) The appellant secured from the Government a considerable extent of vacant land measuring about 420 acres in Madukkarai village in Coimbatore District under a lease for mining purposes. In that area there were several survey numbers, of which we are concerned for the present only with S. No. 950/1 measuring an extent of 60 acres. Just South of it, is S. No. 961/5. In the first instance the term of the lease was 30 years from the year 1934 but this period has not been extended by a further period of 20 years. The respondent purchased one acre from out of S. No. 961/5 from its owner sometime during the year 1950. The respondent had to store Chinese crackers in which he had business and for that purpose he built on the land in the year 1950 a magazine, watchman's quarters, etc. The work was commenced that year and was completed in the following year, the respondent having spent nearly Rs. 17000. It is stated that the building put up would not be worth twice th...
Tag this Judgment!J. Mohammad Hanifa Vs. Tahsildar, Thiruthuraipoondi, Tanjore Dt. and o ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-30-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Mad78; (1963)2MLJ300
1. The short question that arises for consideration in this appeal against the judgment of Srinivasan J. is whether the meeting held for the purpose for passing a "no confidence" motion against the President of Kodinkadr Panchayat at a place different form the office of the Panchayat would by reason of that circumstance alone, be invalid. The appellant was the president of the said Panchayat. Certain of its members tabled a motion expressing want of confidence in notice under S. 152 of the Panchayats Act fixed the village temple as the venue of the meeting for the purpose. It is not disputed that the Panchayat has got its own office. The meeting of the members of the Panchayat was, however, not held there but at the temple. At the meeting eight out of nine members of the Panchayat were present and the appellant the president of the Panchayat, was also one among the present. The meeting duly passed the resolution expressing want of confidence in the president. The latter applied to this...
Tag this Judgment!V.D. Kumarappan Vs. L. Suppiah and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-30-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Mad314
Anantanarayanan, J. (1) This appeal by the plaintiff in the court below, in a suit for recovery of Rs. 13,406-26 nP being his share of the sale proceeds of a property owned in common between him and defendants 1 and 2, together with a direction to the first defendant to pay the amount in India, and for recovery of Rs. 5087-50 nP towards damages, involves only restricted aspect or the suit. As will be clear from the issues framed at the trial, there was also a question of the jurisdiction of the learned Subordinate Judge of Padukottai to try this suit for recovery of a share of sale proceeds of property situate in Ceylon, and sold in Ceylon. There was a further question of the bar of limitation. We are not now concerned with these questions, since the court held that it had jurisdiction, and that the suit was not barred. If we turn, for a moment, to the reliefs sought by the plaintiff (appellant) we see that they are enumerated as, firstly, a direction to first defendant to pay plaintif...
Tag this Judgment!M. Mohanarangiah Chetty Vs. Official Assignee, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-30-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Mad334; (1965)1MLJ221
(1) This is an application filed by the insolvent Mohanarangiah Chetty under the following circumstances. He had been carrying on business in textiles at No. 90 Godown St. Madras for 20 years. He contracted debts in the trade and he was adjudicated insolvent on 21-1-1964 on a creditor's petition. During the pendency of the insolvency proceedings, one creditor, Devi Singh, had obtained and order for attachment before judgment of the stock-in-trade in the place of business. Later, the Official assignee took vacant possession thereof on 3-2-1964. He has locked up the premises. The insolvent says in the application that there are several businessmen who are prepared to take him as a working partner, if permission could be given by this court to carry on the textile business at No. 90 Godown Street. He says that the persons concerned had promised that the insolvent himself would not have any liability for the loss or debts in the business. He says that if permission is granted he is prepar...
Tag this Judgment!State of Madras Vs. S. Subramania Iyer (and Other Connected Cases).
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-29-1964
Reported in: [1966]61ITR613(Mad)
RAMAKRISHNAN J. - In these three revision cases a common question arises as to how the term 'association in individuals' used in the definition of 'person' in section 2(q) of the Madras Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955, has to be interpreted for the purpose of assessment under the said Act, and they were heard together. For the sake of convenience each case will be considered separately.Tax Case No. 49 of 1963.The facts as found by the authorities below are succinctly the following. The assessee, S. Subramania Iyer, filed for the accounting year April 14, 1957, to April 13, 1958, a return in Form II showing a net income of Rs. 1,798.87 nP. He owned 20 shares of lands in Inam Kottur Thottam Village and certain other lands, but with these latter items we are not now concerned. Out of the 20 shares of lands, 5 1/2 shares belonged to the Thanjavur Palace Devasthanam, which Subramania Iyer took on lease. 5 1/2 shares came to be owned by one Muthusubramaniam and his brothers, the daughters ...
Tag this Judgment!M. Chettiappan and Another Vs. Income-tax Officer, Karaikudi, and Anot ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-27-1964
Reported in: [1964]54ITR293(Mad)
The aforesaid write petitions were filed under article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of writs of prohibition or other appropriate writs or orders restraining the respondent, the Income-tax Officer, Karaikudi, from enforcing the collection of arrears if income-tax due, about Rs. 19.5 Lakhs, from the petitioner for the assessment year 1952-53 to 1956-57. The Income-tax Officer treated the petitioner as the principal officer of the association of persons under section 2 of the Indian Income-tax Act, and assessed him in such capacity. There were appeals to the Assistant Commissioner and to be Appellate Tribunal thereafter. There were also proceedings before the High Court on a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act. The result of these proceedings was that it was held that the assessment proceedings for the assessment years 1952-53 to 1956-57 treating the petitioner as the principal officer of the association of persons under section 3 of the Indian Income-tax A...
Tag this Judgment!The Controller of Estate Duty, Madras Vs. Estate of Late Guruswami Mud ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-26-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Mad99; [1965]58ITR64(Mad)
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. We do not consider that the questions propounded do really arise on the facts and the circumstances of the case. Let us take the case as presented by the department itself. The deceased had put up a superstructure on a piece of vacant land which admittedly belonged to his wife. Later he gifted the superstructure to his wife. The question that is sought to be raised is whether the gift is one which would come within the provisions of S. 10 of the Estate Duty Act. It is contended that inasmuch as the deceased, till the end of his life, was living with his wife in the building in question it should be held that there were certain rights in him in regard to the property. We are, however, unable to agree. The living of the deceased with his wife in the building is consistent with their relationship and not because that he retained any interest in the property, namely, in the super structure which he had absolutely gifted to his wife. There are no words in the dee...
Tag this Judgment!Vanagiri Sri Selliamman Ayyanar Uthirasomasundareswarar Temple and anr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-25-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Mad355
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J. (1) Three temples situate in the village of Vangarai in Sirkali Taluk, Tanjore Dt. represented by their trustees instituted a suit which has given rise to this appeal for an injunction restraining the respondents 1 to 4, from interfering with their possession and enjoyment of the suit properties. The suit was later converted into one for recovery of possession. The properties which form the subject matter of the suit consist of three items covering in all an extent of two acres. Out of this one acre was claimed by respondents 1 and 2 as pertaining to carpenter manyam and the remaining extent was claimed by respondents 3 and 4 as a grant to the village barber for rendering certain services. It is not disputed that the respective respondents are residing in he village and serving as carpenters and barbers. The properties originally formed part of the village samudayam and it is now found and that finding has not been challenged before us, that they at an unknown...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Mazid and anr. Vs. I.M. Yacoub
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-24-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Mad329; 1965CriLJ105; (1965)2MLJ31
(1) These are related criminal appeals and we shall first deal with the special appeal by one Fazal Khan (No. 823 of 1963) as that alone involves any problem in the disposal of the grounds of appeal. Briefly, stated, the facts are that this Fazal Khan (appellant), a resident of Mysore, and four others, of whom one Abdoul Mazid, is the appellant in U. S. R No. 15383 of 1963, from Jail, were tried together by the courts at Pondicherry, with regard to alleged offences of house-breaking and theft, complicity in theft, receipt and retention of stolen articles etc. The procedure followed was that of the Inquisitorial System recognised under the French Code of Criminal Instruction or Procedure, namely, there was initial investigation by Judge of Instruction who talk cognisance of the information laid by the police; including the statements of the accused (Process-verbal) and this was followed by a commitment and a trial before the court of first instance. The convictions were under Arts. 379...
Tag this Judgment!Duraiswamy Reddiar and ors. Vs. Chidambara Reddiar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-24-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Mad348
(1) The point that falls to be decided in this appeal filed against the judgement of Venkataraman, J, lies in a narrow compass. The appellant who was the defendant in the trial Court is the owner of S. F. Nos. 132/2, 132/3 and 132/5 in the village of Elandalaipatti. Just to the south of S. F. No. 132/5 there is Government waster land, S. F. No. 132/6 in which there is a well measuring about 8 cents. Adjacent to the well on the southern side is the respondent's nanja lands S. F. No. 216/1. There is unimpeachable evidence in the case to show that the respondent had been taking water from this well to irrigate his lands and that there are in existence permanent structures installed by him, on the well for the purpose. Documentary evidence in the case also shows that the predecessors in title of the respondents had form the year 1907 been dealing with the well as their own property. While so, in August 1953, the appellants tried to take water from this well to their lands lying on the nor...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »