Chennai Court March 1967 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.
V. Perumal Vs. State of Madras, Represented by the Secretary to Govern ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-09-1967
Reported in: (1968)1MLJ27
ORDERP.S. Kailasam, J.1. This petition is filed by the President of the Manapparai Town Panchayat for the issue of writ of certiorari calling far the records pertaining to the formation of the Manapparai Municipality and quashing G.O.Ms. No. 2318, Rural Development and Local Administration Department, dated 30th September, 1966.2. The petitioner is the President of the Manapparai Town Panchayat. The strength of the panchayat is 16 members consisting of 15 elected members and one co-opted woman member. The petitioner was elected as the President cf the Panchayat on 19th April, 1965 for a period of five years. The Government issued G.O.Ms. No. 1989, dated 12th August, 1966 proposing to constitute the area within the jurisdiction of the Manapparai, Kannudaiyanpatti, Kalingapatti and Usilampatti Panchayats into a Municipality. A notification was also issued under Section 4(1)(a) of the Madras District Municipalities Act (V of 1920) declaring the intention of the Government to constitute a ...
Palaniswamy Gurukkal by Power-of-attorney Agent Sivaprakasa Krishnaswa ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-09-1967
Reported in: (1967)2MLJ438
ORDERR. Sadasivam, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition has come before us as Alagiriswamy, J., who heard it in the first instance, found some difficulty in agreeing with the decision of Kailasam, J. in Nallathambi v. Nagarathnaswamy Devasthanam (1965) 2 M.L.J. 386 : I.L.R. (1965) 2 Mad, particularly in view of the decision of the Privey Council in Hansraj Gupta v. Official Liquidator of Dehra Dun etc. Company I.L.R. (1932) All. 1067. The Civil Revision Petition raises an important question, whether a revenue Court has jurisdiction in an application for eviction by a landlord to direct a cultivating tenant under Section 3(4)(b) of the Madras Cultivating Tenants Protection Act, 1055, to deposit the entire arrears of rent, irrespective of the fact that part of it may be time-barred and cannot be recovered in a suit for arrears of rent in a civil Court.2. In the decision in Nallathambi v. Nagarathnaswamy Devasthanam (1965) 2 M.L.J. 386; I.L.R. (1965) Mad. 225, Kailasam, J., has referred to t...
Management of Solar Works, Madras Vs. Workmen Employed in the Solar Wo ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-08-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Mad285; [1967(15)FLR406]; (1968)ILLJ765Mad
ORDER1. Though arguments were advanced at great length and a considerable volume of authority was cited before me, the scope of this writ petition, wherein relief of writ of certiorari under Art. 226 of the Constitution is sought, lies within a narrow compass which can be put down briefly.(2) In 1960, a memorandum of settlement was entered into between the petitioner, the Management of a printing press by name 'The Solar Works' and the respondents, the workmen employed therein. This settlement purported to be a settlement of disputes relating to wages, bonus and dearness allowance, and was to enure for a period of 3 years from 1-9-1960 to 1-9-1963, and it was expressly stated in Clause 7 of the settlement that no fresh demands would be made by the workers gave a notice terminating the settlement on the ground that cost of living had increased the their emoluments, including dearness allowance, should be raised suitably. Since the period for which the settlement was to be in force had n...
A.V. Meiyappan Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Board of Revenue, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-08-1967
Reported in: AIR1969Mad284; [1967]20STC115(Mad)
1. In these writ petitions seeking the issue of appropriate writs, the validity of certain assessments to sales-tax made by the sales-tax authorities and the steps taken by them to revise assessments already made are brought into question. The case is somewhat out of the ordinary and to start with the following facts may be stated. The petitioner is a film producer, being the sole proprietor of Messrs. A. V. M. Productions. In or about 1962, the petitioner obtained for the copyright of a story in Hindi entitled "POOJA KE PHOOL" and on the basis of that story, he produced a cinematograph film. In 1964, a Hindi version of a popular Tamil picture was also produced. The petitioner entered into an agreement with Messrs. A. V. M. Limited, whereunder the petitioner leased to the latter entity the right to exploit the cinematograph film "POOJA KE PHOOL" for a period of 49 years on certain terms, which will be referred to in detail later. In respect of the second film, a similar agreement of le...
T.P. Sokkalal Ramsait Factory Private Limited Vs. Deputy Commercial Ta ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-08-1967
Reported in: [1967]20STC419(Mad)
Veeraswami, J.1. The assessee who is common to these petitions seeks to quash the reassessment orders relating to assessment years 1960-61 to 1964-65, and the original order of assessment for the assessment year 1965-66, bringing to tax certain transactions as sales of goods liable to charge under the provisions of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The assessee is a registered private limited company and is a registered dealer with its registered office at Mukkudal, and carries on the business of manufacture and sale of beedies. For the year 1960-61, it made in Form A-l a return of a total turnover of Rs. 80,50,151.02 and claimed exemption on the entire turnover as representing the turnover in tobacco and its products, namely, beedies. Section 8 of the Act exempts a dealer who deals in the goods specified in the Third Schedule to the Act from payment of tax in respect of such goods, the exemption being subject to the prescribed restrictions and conditions. Item 2 in the Third Sch...
A.V. Meiyappan, Sole Proprietor of A.V.M. Productions Vs. the Commissi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-08-1967
Reported in: (1969)1MLJ480
K. Srinivasan, J.1. In these writ petitions seeking the issue of appropriate writs, the validity of certain assessment to sales tax made by the Sales Tax Authorities and the steps taken by them to revise assessments already made are brought into question. The case is somewhat out of the ordinary and to start with the following facts may be stated. The petitioner is a film producer, being the sole proprietor of Messrs. A. V. M. Productions. In or about 1962, the petitioner obtained the copyright of a story in Hindi entitled Pooja ke Phool and on the basis of that story, he produced a cinematograph film. In 1964, a Hindi version of a popular Tamil picture was also produced. The petitioner entered into an agreement with Messrs. A.V.M. Limited whereunder the petitioner leased to the latter entity the right to exploit the cinematograph film Pooja ke Phool for a period of 49 years on certain terms, which will be referred to in detail later. In respect of the second film, a similar agreement ...
The Management of Solar Works by Proprietor, K.S. Subramania Iyer Vs. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-08-1967
Reported in: (1967)2MLJ378
ORDERP. Ramakrishnan, J.1. Though arguments were advanced at great length and a considerable volume of authority was cited before me, the scope of this writ petition, wherein relief of writ of certiorari under Article 226 of the Constitution is sought, lies within a narrow compass which can be put down briefly.2. In 1960, a memorandum of settlement was entered into between the petitioner, the Management of a printing press by name 'The Solar Works' and the respondents, the workmen employed therein. This settlement purported to be a settlement of disputes relating to wages, bonus and dearness allowance, and was to ensure for a period of three years from 1-9-1960 to 1-9-1963, and it was expressly stated in Clause 7 of the settlement that no fresh demands would be made by the workers while the settlement was in force. In 1961, by a unilateral course, the workers gave a notice terminating the settlement on the ground that cost of living had increased and their emoluments, including dearnes...
A. Palaniandi Vs. G.N. Ramaswami Chettiar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-08-1967
Reported in: (1967)2MLJ403
ORDERP.S. Kailasam, J.1. This petition is filed by a member of Vadagupatti Panchayat in Madurai District for the issue of a writ of mandamus to the President of the Panchayat to forbear from preventing the Petitioner from functioning as a member of the Vadagupatti Panchayat in Periyakulam Taluk, Madurai district.2. The petitioner was elected to the Vadagupatti Panchayat as a member unopposed from Ward No. 5 on 2nd February, 1965. The petitioner belonged to the group of Balakrishnan Chettiar, one of the two groups which contested for the election of the President. The leader of the other group, Sri G.N. Ramaswami Chettiar it is stated came in a car at 7-30 A.M. on 3rd March, 1965, and representing to the petitioner that he was wanted by the Block Development Officer took him away in the car. It is the petitioner's case that he was taken from place to place without his consent under threat and was brought back to the village on 19th April, 1965, and was forced to vote in the election in ...
Management of Presidency Talkies Pro: Paragon Talkies Vs. Mohammed She ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-07-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Mad72; [1967(15)FLR281]
ORDER1. This petition of filed by the Management of the Presidency Talkies for the issue of a writ of certiorari under Article 226 of the Constitution quashing the order of the second respondent, the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Madras, directing the payment of Rs. 2,271.82 nP. to the first respondent Mohammed Sheriff, a former employee of the petitioner. The prior circumstances which led to the filing of this writ petition can be set down briefly.(2) Four persons including the first respondent, Mohammed Sheriff, who were employed by the petitioner as ticket collectors, were retrenched. The said workers and the management entered into a settlement, which was recorded in a memorandum, on 11-1-1961, of a dispute which arose over the retrenchment of the four persons mentioned above. The memorandum recording the terms of the settlement states that the said workers agreed to receive specified amounts in full settlement of their claims. The second clause of the settlement was that the wo...
Mahendrakumar Iswarlal and Co., Tirupattur Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-07-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Mad90
(1) The petitioners are carrying on business in jaggery, groundnut and other articles at Vellore and Tirupattur in North Arcot District. This district has been declared under S. 4(1) of the Madras Commercial Crops Act, 1933, to be a notified area in respect of groundnut and certain other commodities. The petitioners state that on their purchases of groundnuts in the notified area in the year 1962-63, a cess of Rs. 5,298.05 by way of sales tax has been levied and collected under S. 18(1) of the Madras Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1959, read with the relative byelaw framed by the committee under S. 30(1), but they were, however, served by the Commercial Tax Officer, North Arcot, with a notice dated 21-1-1963, provisionally proposing to levy under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959, tax on a total turnover of Rs. 32,05,977.50. The notice mentioned that the petitioners had effected purchases of groundnut for the period from 1-4-1962 to 27-12-1962 to an extent of Rs. 25,64,502 whi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »