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.
Thiruvenkataswami (K.) Vs. Coimbatore Municipality (Represented by Its ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-07-1967
Reported in: (1968)ILLJ361Mad
ORDERKailasam, J.1. This petition is filed by an employee of the electricity department of the Coimbatore Municipality for the issue of a writ of tertiorari calling for the records of the municipality and to quash the order dated 20 February 1966 directing the petitioner to retire on his attaining the age of 55 on 26 December 1966.2. The petitioner Joined service in the electricity department of the Coimbatore Mnnicipality on 15 February 1947 as a wireman and is continuing as such. He attained the age of 55 on 26 December 1966, It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that by virtue of the application of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, and the model standing orders framed thereunder, his age of retirement has been increased to 58.3. The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 (Central Act 20 of 1946), was enacted for the purpose of requiring the employers in industrial establishment to formally define the conditions of employment under them. The Act ...
The Management of Presidency Talkies, Pro. Paragon Talkies Vs. Mohamme ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-07-1967
Reported in: (1967)2MLJ207
ORDERP. Ramakrishnan, J.1. This petition is 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 collections, were retrenched. The said workers and the management entered into a settlement, which was recorded in a memorandum, on 11th January, 1961, of a dispute which arose over the retrenchment of 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 se...
T. Rajagopalan Vs. S. Nagarajan, Executive Officer, Sri Ranganathaswam ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-07-1967
Reported in: (1967)2MLJ259
ORDERP.S. Kailasam, J.1. The petition is filed by one of the worshippers of Sri Ranganathaswamy Temple, Srirangam for the issue of a writ of quo warranto directing the. 1st respondent to show cause under what authority he is holding the office of the Executive Officer of Sri Ranganathaswami Devasthanam. The 1st respondent was serving as District Supply Officer. He was transferred and posted as an Executive Officer of Sri Ranganathaswamy Temple on 8th December, 1966. The appointment is challenged on the ground that the appointing authority for executive officers is only the Commissioner and that the Government has no power to appoint Executive Officers.2. Section 9 of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act empowers the Government to appoint the Commissioner and such number of Deputy and Assistant Commissioners as they think fit. Section 45(1) of the Act provides as follows:Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, the Commissioner may appoint subject to such cond...
Mahendrakumar Iswarlal and Company Vs. the Commercial Tax Officer and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-07-1967
Reported in: (1967)2MLJ146
K. Veeraswami, J.1. The petitioners are carrying in business in jaggery, groundnut and other articles at Vellore and Tirupattur in North Arcot District. This district has been declared under Section 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 Section 18(1) of the Madras Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1959, read with the relative by-law framed by the committee under Section 30(1), but they were, however served by the Commercial Tax Officer, North Arcot, with a notice dated 21st January, 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 1st April, 1962 to...
Public Prosecutor Vs. Raju Chettiar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-07-1967
Reported in: (1967)2MLJ496
K.S. Venkataraman, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the State against the judgment of the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Ariyalur, in C.C. No. 151 of 1964, acquitting the six accused in the case. The complaint was filed by P.W. 1 the Food Inspector of Ariyalur Panchayat, for an offence under Section 7 and Section (1) read with Section 2(ix)(j) and Rule 23 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act XXXVII of 1954.2. P.W. 1 went to the grocery shop of accused 1, Raju Chettiar in Ariyalur about noon on 30th January, 1964, and, suspecting the composition of a packet styled as Misky Compounded Asafoetida, decided to take action under the Act. Accordingly, he called two witnesses, Veeramuthu (P.W. 2) and Krishnamurthi Chettiar. He bought one packet (M.O. 1) weighing 400 grams. for Rs. 1-50, the receipt being signed by accused 1. He observed the usual procedure, divided the contents into three parts, put them into three bottles, closed them and sealed them. One bottle was given to the f...
P.N. Rangaswamy Vs. the Commissioner of Coimbatore Municipality and or ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Mad387; (1969)IILLJ435Mad; (1968)1MLJ329
ORDER1. These two writ petitions are connected. The petitioner in both of them is one P.N. Rangaswami, who, at them time we are concerned with, was employed as a permanent Mathematics Assistant in the service of the Coimbatore Municipality. The terms of his service were governed by the statutory rules issued under the District Municipalities Act. Rule 14 of the Personal Conduct of Officers and Servants of Municipal Council Rules states-'14. Taking part in politics: Subject to any general or special order of the Government, no officer or servant of a Municipal Council shall take part in subscribe in aid of, or assist in any way, any political movement in India, or relating to Indian affairs. When there is room for doubt whether any action which an officer or servant proposes to take will contravene this rule, he should refer the matter to the Government through the executive authority.Note: Subversive activities or the expression of disloyal sentiments by an officer or servant will be r...
M.V.P.C. Ramaswani Naicker Vs. State of Madras.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-1967
Reported in: [1968]69ITR420(Mad)
VEERASWAMI J. - The petitioner, one M.V.P.C. Ramaswami Naicker, applies under section 54(1) of the Madras Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955, to revise an order of the Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax dated August 1, 1964. The petitioner had been permitted to compound the agricultural income-tax payable by him for the assessment years 1958-59 to 1960-61, in his capacity as the karta of a Hindu undivided family. For the assessment year 1961-62 he applied to the Agricultural Income-tax Officer having jurisdiction for an order under section 29(1) of the Act on the ground that there had been a partition of the joint family properties between him and his six minor sons, after setting apart certain properties towards the marriage expenses and provision of his daughters and for the maintenance of his two wives. The Income-tax Officer found, after notices to the concerned parties and enquiry, that the petitioner had a business and other assets, which had not been brought into the partiti...
T.V. Somasundaram Pillai Vs. Official Liquidator
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-03-1967
Reported in: [1967]37CompCas440(Mad)
Ramaprasada Rao, J. 1. Company Application No. 289 of 1965 is an application for setting aside the ex parte decree dated April 22, 1960, made in Company Application No. 78 of 1960 in O. P. No. 374 of 1953 and Company Application No. 178 of 1966 is an application for rectification of the register of members of Cuddalore Construction Company Limited, in liquidation, and also for the deletion of the applicant as a contributory of the company. 2. The relevant facts are as follows : After due compliance with the requirements of Sections 184 and 186 of the Companies Act, 1913, with which we are concerned in this case, and Rules 96, 97 and 98 of the Indian CompanyRules (Madras), 1940, the official liquidator obtained a decree on April 22, 1960, whereby the applicant, as a contributory, was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 910 with interest thereon at 6 per cent, per annum from March 3, 1959. In fact, even at the stage when the list of contributories was sought to be settled, notices as required u...
Chelliah Alias Mayalagor Moopanar Vs. Nagarathinam Ammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-03-1967
Reported in: (1967)2MLJ402
ORDERM. Ananthanarayanan, C.J.1. For evicting the tenant under Section 3(2) of the Madras Cultivating Tenants' Protection Act XXV of 1955, the landlady relied on two grounds. The first was that the tenant (Revision Petitioner) was in arrears for two faslis, the total value of the waram amounting to over Rs. 800. The second point was the interesting one that the tenant (Revision Petitioner) permitted a neighbouring cultivator or landowner to encroach on the holding and to cultivate a portion thereof. According to the landlady, this amounts to an act of 'any negligence which is destructive of, or injurious to, the land' within the meaning of Section 3(2)(b). It also amounts, by implication, to wilful denial of title of the landlady to the land within the meaning of Section 3(2)(d). The learned Revenue Divisional Officer upheld this contention and ordered eviction.2. As regards the second ground, I am afraid that the order of the Revenue Court is not sustainable. Where a cultivating tenan...
M. Srinivasan Vs. S. Sadasivam and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-03-1967
Reported in: (1967)2MLJ383
ORDERP.S. Kailasam, J.1. This petition is filed by the successful candidate in Ward No. 7, Town Panchayat of Thottiam in Musiri Taluk in Tiruchi District for quashing the order of the Election Tribunal, the District Munsif, Kulittalai, declaring the election to Ward No. 7 as void and directing fresh elections to that Ward.2. The elections to the Thottiam Panchayat took place on 2nd February, 1965. For Ward No. 7, three persons contested, viz., the petitioner and respondents 1 and 2. The petitioner obtained 130 votes as against the first respondent who obtained 129 votes and the 2nd respondent who obtained one vote. The petitioner was declared elected. The first respondent filed an election petition challenging the validity of the election of the petitioner. Several objections were raised before the Election Tribunal, but it is unnecessary to state all of them. The Tribunal found that one Angammal was improperly refused a ballot paper and if a ballot paper had been given to her, the res...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »