Chennai Court July 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.
Syed Khaja Gulam Rasool (Died) and ors. Vs. K.M. Bijili Sahib and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-14-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Mad404
ORDER(1) This is a petition seeking to revise the order of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Tiruchi, holding that an application for removal of trustee in a scheme suit is not maintainable, and that the remedy of the petitioners is to file a proper suit for the purpose of the removal of the trustees. A scheme was framed for the management of Tennur Hazarat Kuthisha Durga wakf by the Sub Court on 31-7-1937. The petitioners are shares belonging to Bibi Sahib's branch. The second respondent in the lower court was the hereditary trustee, and, other, non-hereditary trustees. The petition was opposed on the ground that the application was not maintainable.(2) The scheme decree provides for the appointment of trustees. Clause (6) of the decree provides that non-hereditary trustees shall hold office for five years subject to the removal by court in the meanwhile for misfeasance, malfeasance or nonfeasance. According to the respondents, for the purpose of removal of trustees on the ground of mi...
Sha Kishorilal Genajee Vs. Collector of Customs, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-14-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Mad338; (1965)1MLJ162
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.(1) This is an appeal from the judgment of Veeraswami, J., declining to issue a writ of certiorari, applied for by the appellant with a view to quash the order of the Asst. Collector of Customs, Madras, dated 18-6-1962, confiscating certain goods imported by the appellant. The appellant is and established importer of goods from foreign parts. For the half-years (i) April 1960 to September 1960, (ii) October 1960 to March 1961 and (iii) April 1961 to September 1961, he filed applications on 16-6-1960, 1-6-1961 and 22-11-1961, respectively, for importing 'other lamps' under Serial No. 38A(f) of Part II of the Import Policy Book. Licences were granted to him for al the three half-years in January 1962. When the goods arrived at the Madras Harbour on 13-5-1962, it was found that all the consignments were of photo flash bulbs, valued at Rs. 1,985.94 nP. The Assistant Collector of Customs held that the gods were not covered by the licences produced by the appellant a...
In Re : S.T. Shanmugham and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-13-1964
Reported in: 1965CriLJ558
ORDERKunhamed Kutti, J.1. This revision case is directed against the conviction and sentence of fine of the two petitioners by the Sixth Presidency Magistrate, Saidapet, under Section 79 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act.2. The facts of this case are somewhat peculiar. The two petitioners are said to be doing beedi business at 1/17 Narayanappa Garden St. Washermenpet. But, they were found in possession of beedi bundles bearing the trade marks of one Kareem Beedi factory, which, according to the prosecution, being for purposes of trade with a false trade mark was culpable both under Section 420 read with Section 511, I.P.C. and under Section 79 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act of 1958.3. Ex. P. 20 is the complaint made by Abdul Kareem and Co., Manufacturers of the Kareem Beedi. In the course of investigation into this complaint, the Sub-Inspector, P.W. 1, traced the two petitioners who are brothers and searched their house as per the search list, Ex. P. 1, when he is said to ...
Subbakkal Vs. Subba Gounder and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-09-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Mad371; (1965)1MLJ159
(1) The plaintiff's suit was to recover possession of certain property after a declaration that the sale deed dated 25-6-1941 (it must be the sale deed dated 25-6-1941) executed by her grandmother Karuppayee as her guardian was null and void and not binding on the plaintiff. She has failed in both the courts below. She appeals.(2) The property originally belonged to the plaintiff's paternal grandfather. It appears that the father of the plaintiff had himself executed a mortgage for a sum of Rs. 75 on 24-8-1936. After her father's death, the plaintiff, who had also lost her mother, came under the guardianship of her grandmother Karupayee. Karupayee is said to have been looking after her and maintaining her. Karupayee sold the property for a sum of Rs. 240 under the impugned sale deed. Out of the sale price, a sum of Rs. 100 went towards the discharge of the earlier mortgage executed by the plaintiff's father. A sum of Rs. 40 was taken in cash by Karupayee for the maintenance expenses of...
Kasturi and Sons Ltd., Madras Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-08-1964
Reported in: [1965]56ITR346(Mad)
Srinivasan, J. (1) The assessee was previously a registered firm of two partners being the proprietors, publishers and printers of the newspapers 'The Hindu'. This business had been assessed under the 1918 Income-tax Act. In 1940, the partnership firm was dissolved and a limited company took its place. The partnership purported to sell to the limited company the entire business as a going concern. The interest in the partnership had been owned in moieties by two brothers, K. Srinivasan and K. Gopalan, who were the karthas of their respective Hindu undivided families. The capital of the limited company of Rs. Nine Lakhs was divided into 900 shares of Rs. 1000 each, and each branch was allotted half the number of shares. In the books of the company, the assets and liabilities were valued at a particular figure. One of the items so transferred was the stock of newsprint the cost price of which was Rs. 73,693. But the valuation adopted at the time of the transfer of he business to the limi...
Mettur Sandalwood Oil Co., Mettur Dam Vs. State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-08-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Mad291
Ramakrishnan, J. (1) The short question for decision in this case is whether sandalwood oil will fall within one of the articles mentioned in the classification of goods serially numbered as item 51 in the First Schedule to the Madras General sales Tax Act, 1959, which gives a description of goods in respect of which single point sales tax is levied under sub-sec. (2) of S. 3 of the Act, and the rate of such levy.(2) In the year of assessment the appellant who is a manufacturer of sandalwood oil had a very large turnover in sandalwood oil exceeding rupees eleven lakhs, the bulk of which were export sales and about rupees a lakh and odd were sales in this State. The assessing authority levied tax on the single point basis at 6 per cent on the sales treating them as falling under Serial No. 51, which refers to 'scents and perfumes, powders, snows and scented hair oils'. The assessees appealed to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. In the view of the majority of the Tribunal sandalwood oil ...
Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Madras Division Vs. National ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-06-1964
Reported in: [1965]16STC873(Mad)
ORDERRamakrishnan, J.1. This revision is filed by the State against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in Tribunal Appeal No. 819 of 1961. In the view of the assessing authority, the assessee had collected a certain amount of Rs. 5,698.38 by way of sales tax on a transaction which clearly amounted to an inter-State sale hit by the ban under the appropriate article of the Indian Constitution. Nevertheless relying on Section 22(3) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959, the assessing authority directed the assessee to pay this amount to the Government. When the matter came up before the Tribunal, it examined the invoices issued in the case. There were two such invoices. They showed that on the first occasion the sale price was fixed for an amount which included sales tax but the second invoice fixed the sale price at a lesser figure. In the opinion of the Tribunal the assessee did not collect the amount by way of sales tax and therefore the department could not sustain this...
Mooljee Ramjee and Sons Vs. Deputy Commissioner (Commercial Taxes), Ma ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-02-1964
Reported in: [1966]17STC255(Mad)
Ramakrishnan, J.1. The assessees, Messrs Mooljee Ramjee and Sons, contractors of Tiruchirapalli, entered into an agreement with the Southern Railway for collection and training out of stone ballast. The rate agreed upon was Rs. 168 per 1,000 c. ft. The ballast had to be collected and stacked alongside the railway line for a length of lO 3/4 miles. It was also provided in the agreement that the work should be completed within thirteen months from the date of receipt of written orders and that 52,500 c. ft. of ballast should be supplied in every month as basic quantity. The assessees then applied to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Coimbatore, for a permit to quarry stone jelly for bonafide Government purposes and a free permit for quarrying 2,000 c. ft. cart loads of stone jelly from a specified unassessed waste land belonging to the Government of Madras was granted to them, subject to' the condition that the jelly was to be used only for bonafide Government purposes. This free permit wa...
In Re: Athayee and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-02-1964
Reported in: 1965CriLJ566
Anantanarayanan, J.1. These related appeals are by five accused, who were tried before the learned Sessions Judge, Salem, with regard to the alleged murder of a certain man named Oorkaran alias Subbu Goundan. Accused 1, who is a woman was convicted of this murder, and sentenced to imprisonment for life. The other accused were not charged with complicity in the murder itself. But all the five accused, including accused 1, were separately convicted ot causing the disappearance ot the evidence of murder, in order to screen the offender from legal punishment, in furtherance of a common intention shared by all, under Section 201 read with Section 34 I. P. C. On this conviction, each of the accused was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years.2. At the outset itself, we may observe that the joint trial of these persons does appear to have worked a certain hardship, as stressed by the learned Counsel for the accused, Sri V. T, Rangaswami Aiyangar. The hardship is not a legal i...
Rajagopal and anr. Vs. State of Pondicherry
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-02-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Mad144; 1965CriLJ451
ORDER(1) This is a petition that seeks for review by way of Causation, the judgment of the Tribunal Superior d' Appeal at Pondicherry which in turn confirmed the judgment of the Tribunal de Premiere Instance de Karikal, under which the first accused, the petitioner herein, a driver, was convicted and directed to pay a fine of Rs. 20 for causing obstructions to the officers of the Customs Department, involving a contravention of S. 167(78) of the Sea Customs Act, which reads:'If any person intentionally obstructs any officer of customs or other person duly employed for the prevention of smuggling, in the exercise of nay powers given under this Act to such officer or person, such person shall, on conviction before a Magistrate, be liable to imprisonment for nay term not exceeding six months, or to a find of not exceeding one thousand rupees, or to both.'Applying at the same time the principle enunciated in S. 1384 of Chapitre II of Code Civil which deals with delits and quasi-delits and ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »