Chennai Court July 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.
R. Venugopala Reddiar and ors. Vs. Krishnaswamy Reddiar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-18-1969
Reported in: AIR1971Mad262
Ramakrishnan, J. 1. This is a batch of connected appeals. It is common ground that the principal points in controversy arise in A. S. 390 of 1961 and therefore we will take up that appeal first for consideration.2. The learned Principal Subordinate Judge of Tiruchirapalli, who decided the original suit from which this appeal has arisen, O. S. 184 of 1953, has given a judgment covering a wide range of pleas as well as of issues which arise out of them. But for the purpose of the present set of appeals, the controversy has been narrowed down to a shorter number of issues, and arguments both of the appellants as well as of the respondents were confined to these issues. It is therefore sufficient for out purpose to consider only pleas as well as the evidence so far as they are necessary for deciding the points in controversy before us.3. Before we go more fully into the points in controversy, it is necessary to refer to the anterior history of the family to whom the suit properties origina...
Chari and Ram Vs. Employees' State Insurance Corporation
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-1969
Reported in: (1970)IILLJ115Mad
Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. Both the appeals are by the employees. C.M.A. No. 63 of 1967 is against the order passed by the District Judge of Madurai in O.P. No. 2 of 1965 filed by the appellants stating that they were not obliged to respect a demand for contribution made by the Employees' State Insurance Corporation under the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948. C.M.A. No. 64 of 1967 is against the order in O.P. No. 4 of 1965 filed by the Corporation against the firm for contribution, The period during which the firm was liable to contribute is agreed and is not in dispute. Even so the amount payable by the firm to the Corporation. I am not, therefore, touching that aspect of the case and the facts thereto as, in the view that I intend taking finally, it may not be necessary. However, the period during which the contribution is asked for is between 15th July, 1953 and 30th June, 1961. There is some variation in the pleadings, in this case, as to the am mat which the Corporation claims in t...
Sanna Raghava Reddy and anr. Vs. the State of Madras Represented by th ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-1969
Reported in: (1970)2MLJ88
ORDERA. Alagiriswami, J.1. The writ petition raises an important question under the Madras Public Trusts (Regulation of Administration of Agricultural Lands) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The petitioner had taken a lease of an extent of 87-05 acres of agricultural and pasture lands in Vallur Village, Ponneri Taluk belonging to the 2nd defendant-Devasthanam. This lease was entered into for a period of 15 years from 1st May, 1956 to 30th April, 1971. The petitioners allege that they have reclaimed the lands at a considerable cost and are cultivating the lands with their own physical labour, though, not all the lands have been reclaimed. After the Act came into force, the Authorised Officer has passed the impugned order holding that the petitioners are entitled to hold 2.77 acres and 3.37 acres respectively and they should surrender possession of the excess lands held by them to the Trust concerned. Though various contentions have been raised in this writ petition regard...
Chari and Ram, Through Partner C.M.V. Krishnamachari Vs. the Employees ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-1969
Reported in: (1970)2MLJ92
T. Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. Both the appeals are by the employees. C.M.A. No. 63 of 1967 is against the order passed by the District Judge, Madurai, in O.P. No. 2 of 1965 filed by the appellants stating that they were not obliged to respect a demand for contributions made by the Employees' State Insurance Corporation under the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948. C.M.A. No. 64 of 1967 is against the order in O.P. No. 4 of 1965 filed by the Corporation against the firm for contribution. The period during which the firm was liable to contribute is agreed and is not in dispute. Even so the amount is payable by the firm to the Corporation. I am not, therefore, touching that aspect of the case and the facts thereto as, in the view that I intend taking finally, it may not be necessary. However, the period during which, the contribution is asked for is between 15th July, 1953 30th June, 1961. There is some variation in the pleadings, in this case, as to the amount which the Corporation claims i...
Prof. A. Sankaranarayanan Vs. the University of Madras by Vice-chancel ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-15-1969
Reported in: (1970)1MLJ551
ORDERA. Alagiriswami, J.1. Till 1966, the Madras University had jurisdiction over the whole of the State of Madras. In that year the University of Madurai came into existence with jurisdiction over the District of Madurai, Ramanathapuram, Tirunelveli and Kanyakumari. I shall hereafter refer to this area as the Madurai University area and the rest as the Madras University area. Consequent on the exclusion of a portion of the area which was formerely within the jurisdiction of the Madras University, certain amendments were made in the Madras University Act. It is the consequence of those amendments that has given rise to this Writ Petition.2. Under Section 16 of the Madras University Act 1923 the Senate, which is the supreme governing body, has power to make statutes and amend or repeal the same. Under Section 29 of the Act the statutes may provide among other matters for the maintenance of a register of registered graduates. 'Registered graduates', had been originally defined under Clau...
The Mangement of Bhavani Mills Ltd. Vs. the Presiding Officer, Labour ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-14-1969
Reported in: (1970)IILLJ550Mad
ORDERIsmail, J.1. The termination of the services of the three employees Curacaos, Marudhachalam and Kuppuswami working under the petitioners was the subject matter of a reference by the Government under G.O. Ms. No. 3233 (Labour) Department of Industries, Labour and Housing dated 4th August, 1966 to the Labour Court, Coimbatore, the first respondent herein. The Labour Court by its award dated 21.11.1966 held that the services of Curiacose were properly terminated but with regard to Marudhachalam and Kuppuswami, the Labour Court came to a different conclusion and directed the petitioner to reinstate them, in the case of Marudhachalm without back wages, and in the case of Kuppuswami with back wages. It is to quash this award of the Labour Court with reference to Marudhachalam and Kuppuswami, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. For the purpose of appreciating the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioner,...
His Holiness Sri La Sri Ambalavana Pandara Sannadhi Avergal, Adheenaka ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-14-1969
Reported in: (1971)2MLJ339
ORDERM.M. Ismail, J.1. This writ petition challenges the levy of betterment contribution under the Madras Irrigation (Levy of Betterment Contribution) Act, 1955 (Madras Act III of 1955). The facts giving rise to this writ petition are not in dispute. The petitioner-Adheenam owns lands in a number of villages in Ambasamudram Taluk in Tirunelveli district. The main river in Tirunelveli district is the Thambarabarani, which rises from Papanasam Dam and flows from west to east. In its course there are several channels branching off from the river. Among them are two channels in the nothern side of the river called North Kodaimelazhagiyankal and Nadiyunnikal and one channel on the southern side of the river, South Kodaimelazhagiyankal. All three channels take off from upper dams across the river called dams one and two. These dams and these channels have been in existence for a very long time and they are known as upper reaches of the river. The river called Manimuthar flowing from south to...
In Re: Karuppan Alias Mondi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-11-1969
Reported in: (1970)1MLJ631
K.S. Venkataraman, J. 1. The appellant has been convicted under Section 302, Indian Penal Code, for committing the murder of his wife Kuppayee alias Kannammal by stabbing her with a knife on 16th February, 1968 (a Friday) about 10-30 a.m. and has been sentenced to the extreme penalty of the law, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Coimbatore.2. The deceased was the second daughter of witness Subban (P. W. 8). He is a native of Chikkanoothu. He gives an account of the marital life of the accused and the deceased. They were married about ten years before the occurrence. They had three children. They lived together in Cheripalayam (more than ten miles from Chikkanoothu), the village of the accused for about seven years. The accused had, however, no separate house of his own and was living with one of his brothers and his mother. The deceased, however, was reluctant to continue to live with him unless he put up a separate house. She came away to live with her father in Chikkanoothu...
Somasundaram Mills (P.) Ltd., Coimbatore Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Repr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-09-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Mad190; [1969]74ITR669(Mad)
1. This appeal is filed by Messrs Somasundararn Mills (Private) Limited, Coimbatore, the third defendant in O.S. No. 182 of 1961, on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge of Coimbatore. The plaintiff, the principal respondent in this appeal, is the Union of India, represented by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras. The first defendant is a partnership firm represented by its partners Somasundaram Chettiar and Kalaraja Chettiar. One Arunachala Chettiar is the second defendant. The point in issue in this appeal is the nature of the priority to be given to the claims of the State over the claims of other money creditors.2. The facts necessary for the consideration of the present appeal can now be set down briefly. For recovery of arrears of income-tax due by the first and second defendants to the Income-tax Department, seven certificates were issued under Section 46 (2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, to the Collector of Coimbatore, by the authorities of the Income-tax Departme...
The Management of Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. Vs. the Presiding Officer, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-07-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Mad260; (1971)IILLJ215Mad
ORDERAlagiriswamy, J.1. The Petitioner is the Meenakshi Mills Ltd., Madurai, Respondents 2 to 24 are badli workmen working in those Mills. A badli is one who is employed generally in the place of a permanent operative during his absence. During the period 1-11-1965 to 22-4-1966 there was a power-cut of 25% in the supply to all industrial establishments including the petitioner, and consequently the petitioner was obliged to reduce Its production at all levels. The respondents filed applications under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act before the Labour Court, Madurai, for computation of the lay off compensation payable to them under Sec, 25-C of the Act, and the Labour Court has held that all of them are entitled to such compensation- This writ petition is filed to quash those orders.2. Two of the 23 workmen gave evidence that they had been working for more than 240 days in every year for the past 6 and 12 years respectively. In respect of the other 21 workers, though there...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »