Chennai Court December 1969 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.
State of Madras Represented by the Deputy Commissioner (C.T.), Madras ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Mad477; [1970]25STC423(Mad)
Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. The assessee is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, and is a producer of films. The assessee was entrusted with the work of producing the Hindi version of a Telugu picture Bharya Bhartalu and such entrustment was under a written agreement between the assessee and M/s. Papee Films (hereinafter referred to as the producer) dated 4-5-1961. The main features of the agreement may be noted. The production of the picture being of peculiar nature, under the agreement the rush print of the Telugu picture Bharya Bharatlu, Terugu scripts, dialogues and songs were to be furnished to the assessee by the producer. The assessee was to engage the necessary dialogue writers, technicians and other staff and also obtain the necessary raw films for production of the Hindi version of the Telugu picture. After completion of the production in the manner agreed to, the negatives duly censored, were to be handed over to the producer. Under the agreement...
T.C. Ponnuswamy Vs. Labour Court and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1970)IILLJ507Mad
M.M. Ismail, J.1. The petitioner herein who is employed as a driver by the second re pendent, along with nine other persons, field applications bet ore the Labour Court, Comibatore, under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. 1947, claiming payment of additional bonus to the year 1965-66 on the ground that me food allowance which was paid to him am. the value of the uniformed chappals supplied to him by the second respondent pursuant to the provisions contained in the Motor Transport Workers' Act. 1961 (Central Act 27 of 1961), and the Madras Motor Transport Workers' Rules, 1965, made under the Act formed part of salary or wages as defined in he Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the Act)and that bonus should have been calculated on the salary or wages including the said food allowance and the value of the uniform and chappals. The Labour Court by its order dated '6th June, 1967, rejected the claim of the petitioner and dismissed the application. It is to q...
Wheels India Limited Vs. Khemchand Rajkumar and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1970)2MLJ648
S. Ganesan, J.1. Suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 2,07,168.95 against the defendants jointly or severally together with interest at 6 per cent. per annum from the date of plaint till date of recovery.2. The material facts which have led to the institution of the suit may be briefly summarised. The plaintiff, Wheels India Limited is a Company Incorporated under the Indian Companies Act. The first defendant Messrs. K. Rajkumar is a firm carrying on business at Madras with Headquarters at Bombay. The second defendant M/s. National Steel Corporation is a firm carrying on business in Pittsburgh, Pennyslvania, United States of America. After some negotiations with the first defendant firm, which is the Indian representative of the second defendant firm of the United States the plaintiffs forwarded to the second defendant through the first defendant a purchase order Exhibit P-5 for supply of 2447 tons of steel plates the goods to be shipped by sea (60 per cent. by U.S. Vessels and 40 per cen...
Palaniswami Gounder and ors. Vs. State of Madras Represented by Taluk ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-30-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Mad343; 1970CriLJ1232
ORDERKrishnaswamy Reddy, J.1. Batch I:-- In all these petitions, a common point has been raised that the prosecution under Clause 3 of the Madras Paddy and Rice (Movement Control) Order 1966 (hereinafter called 'the Order') is unsustainable for the reason that the said order is invalid as the condition requisite for passing such an order has not been conformed.2. The Madras Paddy and Rice (Movement Control) Order 1966 the Madras Paddy and Rice Dealers (Licensing and Regulation) Order, 1966 and the Madras Paddy and Rice (Declaration and Requisitioning of Stocks) Order, 1966, were all passed by the State of Madras on 20th June 1966. These orders were made in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act 1955 (Central Act 10 of 1955) read with the Government of India, Ministry of Food, Agriculture, Community Development and Co-operation (Department of Food) Notification G. S. R. 906 dated 9th June 1966.3. Section 3(1) of the Essential Commodities Act (here...
Purshotam Ramjee and Company Vs. the State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-30-1969
Reported in: [1971]27STC263(Mad)
Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. In this tax case, the question argued before us is that the goods described by the assessee as cotton seeds are not 'declared goods' within the meaning of Section 8(3)(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, as originally enacted. The case of the assessee was that a turnover of Rs. 1,86,848.44 related to sale of cotton seeds, which, according to him, was a declared commodity. This stand was taken by the assessee, at any rate, before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and reiterated in second appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal, accepting the said contention, did not adopt the lower rate of tax, because in the 'C declaration forms filed by the assessee mention was made that the goods were being purchased for use by him in the manufacture of goods for sale. According to Section 8(3)(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act, as it stood, it is only in cases where declared goods are purchased in the course of inter-State trade and commerce and where s...
Thiru Purshotam Ramjee and Co. Vs. the State of Madras, Represented by ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-30-1969
Reported in: (1971)2MLJ81
1. In this Tax Case, the question argued before us is that the goods described by the assessee as cotton seeds are not 'declared goods' within the meaning of Section 8(3)(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, as originally enacted. The case of assessee was that a turnover of Rs. 1,85,848-44 related to sale of cotton seeds, which, according to him, was a declared commodity. This stand was taken by the assessee, at any rate, before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and reiterated in second appeal before the Sales-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal, accepting the said contention, did not adopt the lower rate of tax, because in the C declaration forms filed by the assessee mention was made that the goods were being purchased for use by him in the manufacture of goods for sale. According to Section 8(3)(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act, as it stood, it is only in cases where declared goods are purchased in the course of inter-state trade and commerce and where such goods were intended ...
K. Natarajan Vs. the Registering Authority, (Regional Transport Office ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-30-1969
Reported in: (1970)2MLJ251
ORDERM.M. Ismail, J.1. The motor car bearing No. MDS 7035 was found to be used as an illicit taxi and for this irregularity the registering authority on 16th January i967 suspended the registration certificate of the car for a period of three months, acting under Section 33 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The car was owned by one C.P. Arappaleeswaran at that time. His appeal to the Regional Transport Authority Salem, was dismissed on 25th September, 1967. However, the owner of the car did not surrender the registration certificate as required by Section 33(4) of the Act. It is stated that the petitioner purchased the car from the said C.P. Arappaleeswaran on 6th November, 1967, and when he sent the registration certificate of the car to the Registering Authority, Salem, that authority by an order dated 24th April, 1968 stated that the order of suspension already passed would be given effect to from 15th May, 1968 to 14th August, 1968, both days inclusive, and that the petitioner herei...
Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Madras Vs. Chencand Estate.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-30-1969
Reported in: [1971]82ITR351(Mad)
RAMAPRASADA RAO J. - A short but an interesting question arises in this tax case. The Tribunal was asked not to allow an expediter amounting to Rs. 1,005 which, admittedly, was incurred by the assessee for supplying vacancies in the re-planted area. What apparently was contended for was, that in a re-planted area, if plants dry up and in the place of such dried up plants fresh plants are supplanted and expenditure in incurred for the purpose, whether it would be an expense 'incurred in the previous year' of cultivating the crop for the purpose of re-planting. The case of the assessee was that during the previous year in question this expenditure was incurred solely to fill up gaps in the area which was already the subject of re-plantation in the previous year and the necessary expenditure incurred therefor. But the revenues contention was that even such expenses incurred would really amount to expenses for replanting within the meaning of the first proviso to section 5(g) of the Madras...
Kotak and Co. Vs. Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-29-1969
Reported in: (1970)IILLJ364Mad
M.M. Ismail, J.1. The second respondent herein was employed as a driver under the petitioner and his services were terminated by an order dated 25th February, 1964, issued by the head office of the petitioner-company at Bombay. Prior to this order dated 2Slh February, 1964, a charge-sheet dated 3rd February, 1964, was sent to the second respondent to his address at Coimbatore and also to his village address near Trichur, the substance of the charge-sheet being the rude and insolent behaviour of the second respondent and also his failure to report for duty on 27th January, 1964. The charge-sheet sent to him to both the addresses was returned un-served. Thereafter, on 7th February, 1964, a telegram was sent to the second respondent to the following effect:Show cause notice sent to you on the third February stop Seth Popitlal Kotak arriving Monday morning report duty forthwith.It is the case of the second respondent that he did not receive that telegram. Even it he had received this teleg...
Pamela Williams Vs. Patrick Cyril Martin
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-19-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Mad427; (1970)2MLJ539
1. This is an appeal against the order of Ismail, J. in an application by the appellant, a mother, under the Guardians and Wards Act (hereinafter called the Act), for custody of her female child, Mary Charmine Martin, aged 14, from the respondent, the putative father, after a declaration that she is the natural guardian. The parties are Anglo-Indians, professing the Roman Catholic faith. They live at Royapuram, within the Madras city limits.When the appellant was barely 17 years of age, respondent, who is her mother's sister's husband, seduced her. This was in the year 1950. R. W. 2, Mrs, Martin, his wife, being frail, fickle minded and sickly, could not prevent this illicit intimacy between these two. The appellant became more and more involved, and she gave birth to the female child with whom we are now concerned on 8-9-1955. She lived with the respondent till the year 1963, and during this period, she was ill-treated and beaten occasionally by the respondent when he was under the in...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »