Chennai Court January 1965 Judgments
R.M. Ramanathan Chettiar Vs. M.Rm.S. Chockalingam Chettiar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-29-1965
Reported in: AIR1965Mad511; (1965)2MLJ17
ORDER(1) This revision petition arises out of an application filed by the petitioner under S. 73 C.P.C. for rateable distribution. He filed O. S. 2347 of 1960 on the file of the City Civil Court, Madras and obtained a decree on 22-12-1960 for a sum of Rs. 25000. During the pendency of the suit, he applied for an order of attachment before judgment and the interim order was made absolute on 20-12-1960. The petitioner filed an application on 28-3-1961 for transfer of this decree to the Sub-Court, Devakottai, for execution, as the properties which were attached before judgment by the petitioner were situate within the territorial jurisdiction of the Sub-Court at Devakottai. His application for transfer was ordered on 1-4-1961 by the City Civil Court and on the same day the decree-holder had applied for execution of the decree in the Devakottai Court.(2) The respondent here who obtained a decree against the judgement debtor in O. S. 206 of 1960 brought the property to sale in E. P.488 of 1...
Tag this Judgment!R. Narayanasami Vs. the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Coimbatore an ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-29-1965
Reported in: AIR1968Mad135
ORDER1. This writ petition is directed against the order of the Labour Court, Coimbatore in C. P. No. 55 of 1963, a petition by a worker claiming lay-off compensation under Sec. 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. A prayer for wages of Deepavali holidays was also added, but that is not now the subject-matter of the writ petition. The subject-matter of the writ petition is a claim to lay-off compensation under Sec. 2(KKK) of the Act for the period 15-10-1962 to 5-2-1963, and amounts to Rs. 165. The management is the proprietor of the branch of the Lakshmi mills at Palladam. It has also got a mill in Coimbatore. At Palladam, there are two units one a unit spinning cotton and the other a unit where there were about 12 weaving frames at the time of the alleged lay-off engaged in weaving staple fibre into textile materials. The practice at that time was to get 'roving bobbins' from Coimbatore for use in the weaving frames at Palladam. There were about 73 workers engaged in Palladam in t...
Tag this Judgment!Huseinny J. Bhagat and anr. Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India, M ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-29-1965
Reported in: AIR1965Mad440
(1) This second appeal involves a question of considerable interest, upon which I am not able to find many decided authorities in this country, there are, indisputably, English authorities, but, for reasons I shall state later, I am certainly doubtful if those authorities could be implicitly followed in India. The broad facts are not in controversy, and a very brief conspectus of them will be sufficient for the disposal of the appeal.(2) There was a certain T. J. Bhagat, a young man of about 24, who according to the record, disappeared form his house on 12-12-1950 and has not been subsequently heard of. It is proved that this young man was married, that he was living with his parents and brothers, and that he was receiving a regular allowance of Rs. 100 per mensem from Bhagat Estates Ltd., a family concern. His father-in-law inserted an advertisement in the "Hindu" in January 1951, along with a photograph, announcing a reward for the informer of the whereabouts of the missing man. The...
Tag this Judgment!Lakshmi Nivas and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-28-1965
Reported in: [1965]58ITR9(Mad)
The judgment of the court was delivered byVENKATADRI J. - On a requisition made by this court under sub-section (2) of section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, the Tribunal has drawn up a statement of the case raising the followin :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the disallowance of the assessees claim, that Rs. 4,681 was a bad debt, it was entitled to write off under section 10(2)(xi) of the Act, was justifie ?'The assessee is a firm carrying on business in purchase and sale of cotton in Coimbatore. Originally, the firm consisting of 4 partners commenced business in the year 1944. There were changes in the constitution of the firm from time to time. On January 1, 1956, one of the four partners retired from the partnership, and on the same day, three more persons were taken in as partners; accordingly, a fresh deed of partnership was drawn up recording the changes in the firm. Before they entered into the fresh partnership in the year 1956, a limited compan...
Tag this Judgment!Management of United Bleachers Private Ltd., Mettupalayam Vs. Presidin ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-27-1965
Reported in: AIR1965Mad454; [1965(11)FLR294]; (1965)IILLJ237Mad; (1965)2MLJ298
M. Anantanarayanan, Offg. C.J. (1) This is an appeal instituted by the Management of the United Bleachers (Private) Ltd., Mettupalayam, from the judgment of Veeraswami J., in W. P. No. 129 of 1962, which itself was a proceeding for the issue of a writ of certiorari, quashing the award in I. D. 41 of 1961 on the file of the Labour Court, Coimbatore. The facts have to be set forth, first, with some precision and care, for a proper appreciation of the true scope of controversy before us. For the purpose of the disposal of this appeal, we are segregating certain essential facts alone for notice, and disregarding others.One P. Krishnan, employed as a workman in the organisation of the appellant institution, in a particular capacity of a supervisor of a shift, in the stitching department, was informed by a letter of the management, dated 3-10-1957, that his post was abolished. This was in consequence of a decision by the Management to work both stitching machines during the day-shift, and to...
Tag this Judgment!Rajagopala Naidu Vs. Aiyyaswamy Chettiar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-25-1965
Reported in: AIR1965Mad532; (1965)2MLJ135
(1) The plaintiff who has failed in the courts below, on a question of limitation, is the appellant in this second appeal. The plaintiff had a subsisting lease with the second defendant over a premises in a busy locality in Rangai Gowder St., Coimbatore. During the currency of that lease, the second defendant granted a lease to the first defendant. The plaintiff agreed to surrender his right as lessee over the premises and in consideration thereof, an agreement. A.2 dated, 29-12-1952 was entered into between the first and second defendants to the effect that for a period of 15 days, at the time of Deepavali each year, the plaintiff would be permitted to occupy the downstairs portioning the premises to sell crackers. Even though this agreement purports to be one between the first and second defendants, the recitals of the agreement taken along with the fact that the plaintiff himself has signed this agreement leave no room for doubt that the plaintiff also should be regarded as a party ...
Tag this Judgment!Banda Brothers Vs. Board of Revenue, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-22-1965
Reported in: AIR1966Mad179; [1965]16STC664(Mad)
ORDER(1) In these two writ petitions, the petitioners seek writs of certiorari to quash the orders of the Board of Revenue in so far as they relate to the assessments of the assessment years 1954-55 and 1955-56 in the following circumstances. The petitioners have been carrying on business at Bombay as commission agents in piecegoods. Against orders received from their constituents in this State, they were purchasing and supplying piecegoods. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer called for returns, but as the account books of the petitioners were with the Sales-tax authorities of Bombay they could not furnish the returns. For the two years in question, the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer made assessments on a best of judgment basis, fixing the turnover for the two years at Rs. 15 lakhs and 7 lakhs respectively. The petitioners preferred appeals. By this time, the account books had been returned to the party by the Sales Tax Authority of Bombay, and on the basis of those accounts, the appella...
Tag this Judgment!ismail Beevi and anr. Vs. Sulaikkal Beevi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-22-1965
Reported in: AIR1967Mad250; (1965)2MLJ132
(1)This appeal arises out of a suit filed by the first respondent herein for a declaration of her title to the suit property and for a permanent injection restraining the appellants and respondents 2 and 3 herein from interfering with her possession and enjoyment of that property. The first appellant herein (the first defendant) is the mother-in-law of the first respondent herein and the second appellant and respondents 2 and 3 are the sons of the first appellant.(2) The allegations in the plaint are that the suit property originally belonged absolutely to the first appellant (first defendant). Sometime before the marriage of the first respondent with the son of the first appellant, first appellant executed a gift deed, Ex. A. 1, D/- 1-6-1955 in her favour with a direction that the first respondent (daughter-in-law) should discharge the debts to the extent of Rs. 700 and that after the marriage she would be entitled absolutely to the suit property. Accordingly, the marriage took place ...
Tag this Judgment!P.N. Venkatasubramania Iyer and ors. Vs. P.N. Easwara Iyer and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-21-1965
Reported in: AIR1966Mad266
(1) I have had the advantage of perusal of the judgment of my learned brother, in which he has dealt elaborately and fully with the main issues of fact that arise for our determination in these appeals. I am in entire agreement with his conclusions; that being the case, I felt somewhat hesitant to write a separate, concurring judgment. That hesitancy was reinforced by the consciousness that, though the case does involve the application of several principles of Hindu law, to the facts, those principles themselves are well settled, and enunciated in decisions that are now classic. Nor does the application of the principles to the facts of the case involve any novel departure in any respect. Nevertheless, I propose, in a brief compass, to survey the principles of Hindu law, that impinge on the facts and circumstances of this case. There are at least one or two refinements that render this expedient. I must make it clear, however, that I am not traversing the facts and evidence again, ind...
Tag this Judgment!Swami Motor Transports Ltd., Tanjore Vs. the Commissioner of Income-ta ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-20-1965
Reported in: AIR1965Mad516; [1966]36CompCas345(Mad); [1966]60ITR234(Mad)
Srinivasan, J. 1. The question that stands referred to us is:'Whether in respect of the assessment years 1954-55 and 1955-56, the expenses of payment to the auditor and/or advocate of Rs. 4,000 and Rs. 3,050 respectively can be claimed as a proper charge on the business income filed under S. 10(2) of the Act or on general principles of Commercial Expediency.'(2) The assessee is a private limited company which carried on transport business. The relevant accounting years ended on the 31st of March 1954 and 1955. There were 13 shareholders in the company Towards the end of 1953, certain disputes arose which, resulted in an application being made under S. 153C of the Companies Act, 1913 and in the appointment by the High Court of an Interim Administrator. The High Court also appointed M/s. Suri and Co., a firm of Chartered Accountants, to investigate into the affairs of the company for the period form 1-4-1952 to 30-6-1953. In the course of these proceedings, the High Court directed the pa...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »