Chennai Court December 1965 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.
Anbanathapuram Vagaira Charities Tiruvilondur, Mayuram Town Vs. T.V. S ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-1965
Reported in: AIR1967Mad305
(1) These petitions raise a question of Court-fee. The suits filed by the petitioner, who is the same in all the petitions, were in ejectment, the respondent in each case being the tenant. The plaint in each case alleged that the defendant had accepted the plaintiff as the owner of the property and agreed that he would surrender vacant possession of the suit land after removing the superstructure and that the tenant had put up superstructure. The plaint further stated that the tenancy was governed by the provisions of the City Tenants Protection Act, and, therefore, the requirement of that Act had been complied with by the issue of a proper notice. The prayer in the suits was for a decree that the defendant should put the plaintiff in possession of the suit property and the superstructure thereon on receiving a compensation of Rs. 1000 the market value of the superstructure, and Rs. 2 for the trees and for payment of arrears of rent as may be determined. For the purpose of court fee, ...
Petroleum Workers Union Vs. A. Mohamed and Co., Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-1965
Reported in: AIR1967Mad33
(1) This revision petition arises out of proceedings before the House Rent Controller, Madras. The respondent-landlord filed an application, under S. 10 of Act 18 of 1960, for eviction of the petitioner-tenant on the ground that the petitioner had sub-let the premises to various other unions who committed nuisance, acts of waste using the building for purposes other than that for which it was leased, and also on the ground that the landlord required the portion bona fide for his own use and occupation as additional accommodation. The petitioner is the Petroleum Workers Union, represented by the General Secretary. According to the respondent-landlord, contrary to the terms of the tenancy, the petitioner-union used to allow its sister unions to conduct their meetings, that such meetings were noisy and stormy causing nuisance to the occupiers of the other portions of the premises, and that they had sublet from premises to the other unions collecting rents from them. The other grounds all...
Thirumal Reddiar Vs. Koppiah Reddiar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-1965
Reported in: (1966)2MLJ155
P.S. Kailasam, J.1. The defendant is the appellant. The plaintiff filed the suit for partition and separate possession of his half-share in the property belonging: to Koppiah Reddiar. Koppiah Reddiar and Ramaswamy Reddiar arebrothers Ramaswamy Reddiar had two wives Subbammal and Veerangammal. In or about 1936, Ramaswamy Reddiar was keeping indifferent health and it is the case of the defendant that the present plaintiff, Koppiah Reddiar, who was about 6 years of age was adopted by Ramaswamy Reddiar. Thirumal Reddiar, the defendant herein, is Koppiah Reddiar's second son. If the defendant fails in. establishing that the plaintiff was adopted by Ramaswamy Reddiar, admittedly the plaintiff will be entitled to partition and separate possession of half-share in his father Koppiah Reddiar's property.2. In order to prove the adoption, the defendant examined three witnesses on his behalf and filed Exhibits B-1 to B-4. The adoption is stated to be in the year 1936, and soon after the adoption, ...
Gorborandum Universal Ltd., Madras Vs. Union of India
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-01-1965
Reported in: AIR1966Mad365
Veeraswami, J. 1. This petition is for a rule of mandamus directing the respondent, Union of India, represented by the Ministry of Finance, to issue a recognition that the Central Government is satisfied that the petitioners are engaged in the manufacture of one or more of the articles specified in Part A of the Fifth Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961. The petitioners are a public limited company incorporated in 1954, and are said to be engaged during the relevant time in the manufacture of grinding wheels and abrasives, being the industrial machinery specified in sub-clause (iii) of clause C of Part A of the Fifth Schedule to the Income-tax Act. The petitioners, as they aver, are assessed to income-tax by the First Income-tax Officer City Circle for 1960-61 and 1961-62, and in the course of these assessments they claimed that their profits in the manufacture of grinding wheels were exempt from income-tax under S. 15-C of the Indian Income-tax Act 1922. This contention, according to...
HussaIn Bhai and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras Overruled
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-01-1965
Reported in: AIR1967Mad38; [1966]62ITR456(Mad)
Veeraswami, J. 1. This reference raises question of limitation in respect of action taken by the Revenue under S. 34(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act 1922. The assessment for the assessment year 1948-49 was originally made on 30-9-1948, on a total income of one A.B. Fazallali. He died on 1-8-1954, leaving his widow and three sons as his heirs and legal representatives. There was a deposit of Rs. 40,000 in the Bank of India, Palanpur, North Gujarat by the assessee which was investigated by the Revenue. This amount had not been included in the return. On 9-2-1957, notice under S. 34(1)(a) of the Act was issued to one Hussain Bhai Abdullabhai, a son by the first wife of Fazallali. He filed a return on 9-3-1957 showing this amount in the D section. The validity of this notice was challenged in this court by W.P. 231 of 1957 under Art. 226 of the Constitution. Since no stay of further proceedings in assessment was granted, the assessment was completed on 15-3-1957, under S. 34(1)(a). On 15-3-195...
Corborandum Univeral Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi), by the Secretary, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-01-1965
Reported in: (1966)2MLJ129
K. Veeraswami, J.1. This petition is for a rule of mandamus directing the respondent, Union of India, represented by the Ministry of Finance, to issue a recognition that the Central Government is satisfied that the petitioners are engaged in the manufacture of one or more of the articles specified in Part A of the Fifth Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961. The petitioners are a public limited company incorporated in 1954 and are said to be engaged during the relevant time in the manufacture of grinding wheels and abrasives, being the industrial machinery specified in Sub-clause (iii) of clause C of Part A of the Fifth Schedule to the Income-tax Act. The petitioners, as they aver, are assessed to income-tax by the First Income-tax Officer, City Circle, for 1960-61 and 1961-62, and in the course of these assessments they claimed that their profits in the manufacture of grinding wheels, were exempt from income-tax under Section 15-C of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. This contention, ac...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›