Chennai Court October 1968 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.
Asea Electric (India) Private Limited and ors. Vs. Joint Commercial Ta ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-14-1968
Reported in: [1969]23STC160(Mad)
Veeraswami, J.1. These petitions for certiorari by different assessees raise a common point and have, hence, been heard together. It will suffice to notice the facts in the first of these petitions, to determine the main questions. The Asea Electric (India) Private Limited paid a sum of Rs. 42,915.58 as tax at six per cent, on the turnover of Rs. 6,60,239.66, being the value of machinery imported from Sweden and sold to Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, under a permit therefor issued to the latter by the Assistant Controller of Imports, under the Import Trade Control Regulations. The permit was dated 12th November, 1964. According to the terms of the contract between the parties, the seller was paid 90 per cent, of the invoice value and the sales tax in full when presenting the invoice to the purchaser. That was on 4th February, 1966. A second invoice also was presented on 24th March, 1966. The assessment was on the combined values under both the invoices. The seller, in its return for...
In Re: P. Chelladurai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-14-1968
Reported in: (1969)1MLJ508
N. Krishnaswamy Reddy, J.1. The appellant Chelladurai was convicted under Section 161, Indian Penal Code, and Section 5 (2) read with Section 5 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, by the Special Judge and District Magistrate, Thanjavur at Kumbakonam, in Special Case No. 2 of 1966 and sentenced to R.I. for one year under the latter section. No separate sentence was awarded under Section 161, Indian Penal Code.2. The appellant was charged for having received a sum of Rs. 30 from P. W. 1 Panchmurthi as a motive or reward for doing a favour to him in the exercise of his; official functions, namely, for making arrangements to accept the re-tender submitted by P.W. 1, by the office of the District Medical Officer, Thanjavur at Nagapattinam.3. The prosecution case is briefly this : The appellant, during the relevant period was a Lover Division Clerk attached to the Government Hospital, Mannargudi. One of his duties was to attend to the tenders submitted by the contractors for supply ...
Asea Electric (India) Private Ltd. and ors. Vs. the Joint Commercial T ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-14-1968
Reported in: (1969)2MLJ632
K. Veeraswami, J. 1. These petitions for certiorari by different assessees raise a common point and have, hence, been heard together. It will suffice to notice the facts in the first of these petitions, to determine the main questions. The Asea Electric (India) Private Limited, paid a sum of Rs. 42,915-58 as tax at six per cent on the turnover of Rs. 6,60,239-66, being the value of machinery imported from Sweden and sold to Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, under a permit therefor issued to the latter by the Assistant Controller of Imports, under the Import Trade Control Regulations. The permit was dated 12th November, 1964. According to the terms of the contract between the parties, the seller was paid 90 per cent of the invoice value and the sales-tax in full when presenting the invoices to the purchaser. That was on 4th February, 1966. A* second invoice also was presented on 24th March, 1966. The assessment was on the combined values under both the invoices. The seller, in its retur...
Monna Ahamad (Died) and ors. Vs. Khadeeja Beevi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-11-1968
Reported in: (1970)1MLJ285
ORDERK.S. Venkataraman, J.1. This is an appeal of a judgment-debtor against the order of the learned Subordinate Judge of Padmanabhapuram in Kanyakumari District overruling his objection to the execution and allowing execution to proceed. The decree was passed in a mortgage suit by the District Court, Nagercoil, on 24th August, 1954. Actually, Kanyakumari District was integrated with the Madras State only with effect from 1st November, 1956. Though the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code (Act V of 1908) and in particular Order 34 had been brought into force even from 1951 in the area which then formed part of Travancore-Cochin, the practice which existed before 1951 prevailed, namely, of drawing up only one decree even in a mortgage suit instead of two decrees, one preliminary decree and final decree as contemplated in Order 34. The one decree which was drawn up was to the effect that if the amount mentioned in the decree was not paid before a certain date, the hypotheca would be br...
Sri Mottayan Alias Ponnuswami Vs. Sri Thambuswami Padayachi and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-10-1968
Reported in: (1970)1MLJ137
M. Natesan, J.1. These second appeals arising out of three connected suits raise an interesting and important question of law, to be specific, the question whether during the relevant period there has been a statute current as contended for the appellants.2. The properties in the suits are agricultural lands and the suits are in ejectment and for future profits. The suit wet lands R.S. No. 407/4, thirty-three cents R.S. No. 403/1, eighty cents and R.S. Nos. 325/7 and 325/8 and 302/2 seventyninc cents, situate in Kavalkoodam Village, Neelathanallur vattam, Thanjavur District, belonged to one Narayanaswami Pillai. According to the findings of the Courts below, he was cultivating his lands in Pannai till 11th November, 1952 when under Exhibit A-2, he leased the lands in the suits and other lands to one Varadaraja Padayachi, the first defendant in three suits under second appeal who was the Village Munsif of the vattam and who had been acting as the agent of Narayanaswami Pillai and collec...
Public Prosecutor Vs. Rathinam (A.)
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-09-1968
Reported in: (1970)ILLJ295Mad
Krishnaswami Reddi, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the State Public Prosecutor against the order of acquittal by the Sub divisional Magistrate, Erode, in S.T.R. No. 74 of 1966 under Section 245(1), Criminal Procedure Code, This is a very simple case. The respondent is the manager of Sivaram Vilas Press, Erode. P. W. 1, Shanmaga Vadivel, is the Assistant Labour inspector. He inspected the said press on 20 January 1966 and found certain defects. He issued a show-cause notice to the respondent through his office peon F. W. 2 on 2 April 1966, but the respondent refused to receive the said notice. Hence, a complaint was filed by P. W. 1 against the respondent for having contravened the provisions of Section 46 of the Madras Shops and Establishments Act, 1947.2. The respondent when questioned denied having refused to receive the notice and stated that he was neither the manager nor an employee of the press. He also denied his relationship with the press. The learned Sub divisional Ma...
Paramakudi Bus Transports (P.) Ltd. Vs. the Regional Transport Authori ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-09-1968
Reported in: (1969)2MLJ370
M. Anantanarayanan, C.J.1. These related Writ Appeals involve a question of some interest and importance, with regard to certain provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, and the respective spheres of function of the concerned quasi-judicial Authorities, where the grant of a permit applies to what is termed as an inter-district route. In Writ Petition No. 765 of 1966, the appellant in both these appeals, viz., Paramakudi Bus Transports (Private) Limited, sought the issue of a Writ of Prohibition, restraining the Regional Transport Authority, Ramanathapuram, from proceeding with the grant of a stage carriage permit on the route Mudukolathur to Vembar, which is an inter-district route. In Writ Petition No. 764 of 1966, the same appellant sought the issue of a writ of certiorari, striking down certain proceedings of the Transport Commissioner in R. No. 25676/E-2/65, dated 19th August, 1965, by which, that Authority (Transport Commissioner) purported to settle a dispute between the two Regiona...
K.S. Chakravarthi Iyengar (Died) and ors. Vs. Chinnakutti Reddy and or ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-1968
Reported in: (1971)1MLJ389
K.S. Ramamurti, J.1. This second appeal has been filed by the plaintiff (and continued after his death by his legal representatives) against the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge, Salem.2. The plaintiff filed the suit to recover possession of the suit properties on the ground that he is the nearest reversioner of one Srinivasaraghavachari, that the latter died on 20th November, 1908, possessed of the suit properties, that thereafter his widow Janaki Ammal enjoyed the properties for sometime and that later on the defendants have been in possession of the properties claiming under certain alienations and claiming title through the alienees. The widow Janaki Ammal died in December, 1951, and the plaintiff filed the suit as the nearest reversioner of Srinivasaraghavachari, in the year 1959.3. Both the Courts have concurrently found that suit properties belonged to Srinivasaragavachari and that the plaintiff is the nearest reversioner. In this view (after negativing the c...
S. Pachiappa Mudaliar, Proprietor, Lakshmi S.P.S. Vilas Vs. the State ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-1968
Reported in: (1969)1MLJ597
ORDERK. Srinivasan, J.1. Bus P.-2739 was found to be overloaded by two passengers at the time it was checked by the Regional Transport Officer on 8th November, 1964. When the explanation of the permit-holder was called for, he only stated that the checking officer had not obtained the signatures of the conductor and the driver on the check report, nor did he obtain the signatures from the passengers who travelled in the bus. The operator further stated that he was told by the driver and the conductor that there was no overload. He claimed further that he had ascertained from the passengers who travelled in the bus that there was no overload and he produced affidavits from two alleged passengers signed by them on 29th December, 1964 and 30th December, 1964. The Regional Transport Authority, who dealt with the matter was not prepared to accept the explanation, He found the offence of overloading established, and suspended the permit for one day. The operator appealed to the State Transpo...
In Re: Kannan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-1968
Reported in: (1969)2MLJ109
R. Sadasivam, J.1. Appellant Kannan has been convicted under Section 302, Indian Penal Code, for having caused the death of his child Ambujam. alias Marimuthu, aged about 4 years, at about 1-30 p. m. on 25th December, 1967 at Nannadu village and sentenced to imprisonment for life. He has also been convicted under Section 326, Indian Penal Code, on a charge under Section 307, Indian Penal Code, (second part) for having caused several injuries to his wife P. W. 1, Amaravathi, with a knife, in the course of the same transaction.2. The facts of this case are in a short compass. The appellant suspected his wife, P.W. 1, of being in illicit intimacy with Poongan, his elder brother's son, and also suspected that she had taken a treasure trove from a broken wall of the dilapidated house and concealed the same. These facts put forward as motive for the attack made on P. W. 1 appear from the evidence of P. W. 10, Duraisami Josiyar, and P. W. 11, Alagirisami Udayar. In fact P.W. 1 has referred to...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›