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.
M.V. Ramaswami Nadar Vs. the State of Madras and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-07-1969
Reported in: AIR1971Mad136
1. This matter raises a question of refund of court-fee. Pending the writ appeal filed by the appellant-petitioner, he got the relief, he wanted outside the court. At his request, the writ appeal had been dismissed as withdrawn. It had not been even numbered and was in the S. R. stage. The appellant therefore, applies for refund of court-fee.2. There is no dispute that S. 70 of the court-fees and Suits Valuation Act has no application, for, none of the ground exists which would bring the case within its scope. In such a case, the course adopted by this court, in a number of cases, is that if it is so satisfied ex debito justitiae, it would certify that it is a fit and proper case for the revenue to refund the fee subject to the deduction of the usual spoliation charges.3. One such case in point is Smt. Periathayya v. Narasinga Rao, . One of us referred to Thammayya Naidu v.Venkataramanamma, ILR 55 Mad 641 = (AIR 1932 Mad 438) and Chidambara Chettiar in re, ILR 57 Mad 1028 = (AIR 1934 M...
Gnanambikai Mills Ltd. Vs. Employees' State Insurance Corporation
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-07-1969
Reported in: (1970)IILLJ233Mad
Ramamurthi, J.1. This appeal arises out of an order passed by the learned District Judge functioning as the Court of Employees' State Insurance, Coimbatore, on an application filed under Section 73 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, hereinafter called the Act.2. The appellant is a limited company carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of cotton yarn. The Regional Director issued a demand notice to the appellant on 20th March 1963, to the effect that the concerned Insurance Inspector inspected the records of the appellant-mills on 29th January, 1963, that certain workers have not been registered and the employees' contribution due in respect of these workers had not been paid. The notice further called upon the appellant to pay all the arrears in respect of the workers by submitting distribution cards as required by the rules. Thereupon, the present application No. 2 of 1963 was filed by the appellant mills on 6th June, 1963 for an adjudication and declaration by the court...
M.V. Ramaswami Nadar Vs. the State of Madras, Represented by the Colle ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-07-1969
Reported in: (1970)1MLJ240
ORDERK. Veeraswami, C.J.1. This matter raises a question of refund of Court-fee. Pending the writ appeal filed by the appellant-petitioner, he got the relief, he wanted outside the Court. At his request, the writ appeal has been dismissed as withdrawn. It had not been even numbered and was in the stamp register stage. The appellant, therefore, applies for refund of Court-fee.2. There is no dispute that Section 70 of the Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act has no application, for, none of the grounds exists which would bring the case within its scope. In such a case, the course adopted by this Court, in a number of cases, is that if it is so satisfied ex debito justitiae, it would certify that it is a fit and proper case for the Revenue to refund the fee subject to the deduction of the usual spoliation charges.3. One such case in point is Srimathi Periathayya v. Narasinga Rao : (1966)2MLJ159 . One of us referred to Thammaya Naidu v. Venkataramanamma I.L.R.(1932)Mad. 641 : 62 M.L.J. 541 a...
U. Karuppan and ors. Vs. S.K. Lakshminarayana Iyer, Rent Court-cum-tah ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-04-1969
Reported in: (1970)2MLJ314
ORDERM.M. Ismail, J.1. The first respondent in these six Writ Petitions filed applications against the petitioners in these Writ Petitions under Section 9 of the Madras Cultivating Tenants (Payment of Fair Rent) Act, 1956, on 12th January, 1963 for fixation of fair rent in respect of the lands in Kalaiyoor Inam Village. While proceedings were pending, the village was notified and taken over by the Government under Madras Act (XXVI of 1963). Thereafter, the petitioner in these Writ Petitions filed applications before the Tahsildar, Paramakudi (Rent Court) praying that the enquiry need not be taken up and the entire proceedings have to be dropped till the main question that the lands are iruwaram lands of the first respondent is decided by the Settlement Court before which the petitioners (petitioners in the Writ Petitions) and the respondent (the first respondent herein) have filed applications and the question whether the lands are pannai or not can be decided only by the Settlement Of...
Balaji Mills Vs. the State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-03-1969
Reported in: [1972]29STC397(Mad)
Veeraswami, C.J. 1. We are not inclined to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. The assessee having made a return, he has to stand by it. He could not say that because he did not have the books with him, therefore, the return could have been incorrect. That is not contemplated by the Act. If he could not make a return, in the absence of the books, he could have taken time for making the return, or alternatively, while making the return, he could have stated he could not vouch for the correctness of the same. Neither course he took. The return submitted having been found to be incorrect, necessarily the Tribunal's decision is correct. The tax case is dismissed. ...
V.S. Swaminatha Pillai Vs. the Authorised Officer (Land Reforms) and o ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-03-1969
Reported in: (1970)1MLJ238
ORDERA. Alagiriswami, J.1. Petitioner had taken on lease an extent of 45 acres 48 cents of wet land and 7 acres 22 cents of dry land from the third respondent for a period of 25 years from Kollam Andu 1122 corresponding to 1945-46. The Authorised Officer took the view that he was a cultivating tenant under the third respondent--Trust within the meaning of the term under the Madras Public Trusts (Regulation of Administration of Agricultural Lands) Act, 1961. Under the Act a cultivating tenant's ceiling area is five standard acres and any extent in excess reverts to the lessor. The Authorised Officer therefore took the view that the petitioner should surrender lands in excess of five standard acres to the Trust. He ordered notice under Rule 9 (i) of the Madras Public Trusts (Regulation and Administration of Agricultural Lands) Rules, 1962 for selecting the excess lands that have to be surrendered by the petitioner. The petitioner took up the position that by Section 4 of the Holdings (St...
S.C.C. Anthony Pillai Vs. W.R. Nedanchezian
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-01-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Mad509; 1970CriLJ1593
ORDERKrishnaswamy Reddy, J. 1. This petition has been filed by the complainant S. C. C. Anthony Pillai against the order of the VIII Presidency Magistrate in M. P. No. 143 of 1967 in C. C. No. 898 of 1967 dismissing the complaint of defamation filed by him against the respondent on the ground that sanction under Section 196, Criminal P. C. was not obtained as the facts of the complaint disclosed an offence under Section 171-G, I. P. C.2. The order of the VIII Presidency Magistrate is clearly wrong.3. The petitioner was former Member of Parliament and an active Trade Union aleader for about 28 years. He contested in the last General Elections from the North Madras Parliamentary Constituency for a seat in Lok Sabha. While the election campaign was going on, in the issue bearing date 17-1-1967. in the Tamil Daily 'Nam Nadu'. of which the respondent was the Editor. Printer and Publisher, certain allegations were made affecting the conduct and character of the petitioner, the extracts of wh...
The Corporation of Madras Represented by the Commissioner Vs. R. Sunda ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-01-1969
Reported in: (1971)2MLJ365
K. Veeraswami, C.J.1. This appeal arises from an order of Kailasam, J., allowing the first respondent's petition under Article 226 of the Constitution and directing the appellant, which is the Corporation of Madras, to apply for sanction of the State Government as provided for in Section 102, proviso (a) of the Madras City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919, for exemption of the whole of water and drainage tax and the lighting tax in the West Mambalam area. The first respondent is a landlord residing in West Mambalam and is said to own four houses in different roads in the area. He complained that the West Mambalam area had been neglected and uncared for by the Corporation in providing water and drainage amenities, which has caused great inconvenience to the residents in the area. The demand notices served on the first respondent showed that the property tax was levied at a certain percentage of the annual value of the buildings and the tax included levy for water, drainage and lighting. ...
S.C.C. Anthony Pillai Vs. V.R. Nedunchezhian
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-01-1969
Reported in: (1970)2MLJ30
ORDERN. Krishnaswamy Reddy, J.1. This petition has been filed by the complainant S.C.C. Anthony Pillai against the order of the VIII Presidency Magistrate in M.P. No. 143 of 196T in C.C. No. 898 of 1967 dismissing the complaint of defamation filed by him against the respondent on the ground that sanction under Section 196, Criminal Procedure Code, was not obtained as the facts of the complaint disclosed an offence under Section 171-G, Indian Penal Code.2. The order of the VIII Presidency Magistrate is clearly wrong.3. The petitioner was a former member of Parliament and an active trade union leader for about 28 years. He contested in the last General Elections from the North Madras Parliamentary Constituency for a seat in Lok Sabha. While the election compaign was going on in the issue bearing date 17th January, 1967, in. the Tamil Daily ' Nam Nadu ' of which the respondent was the Editor, Printer and Publisher certain allegations were made affecting the conduct and character of the pe...
The Corporation of Madras, Represented by the Commissioner Vs. R. Sund ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-01-1969
Reported in: (1970)2MLJ348
ORDERK. Veeraswami, C.J.1. This appeal arises from an order of Kailasam, J., allowing the first respondent's petition under Article 226 of the Constitution and directing the appellant, which is the Corporation of Madras, to apply for sanction of the State Government as provided for in Section 102 proviso (a) of the Madras City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919, for exemption of the whole of water and drainage tax and the lighting tax in West Mambalam area. The first respondent is a landlord residing in West Mambalam and is said to own four houses in different roads in the area. He complained that the West Mambalam area had been neglected and uncared for by the Corporation in providing water and drainage amenities, which has caused great inconvenience to the residents in the area. The demand notices served on the first respondent showed that the property tax was levied at the certain percentage of the annual value of the buildings and the tax included levy for water, drainage and lighting...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›