Chennai Court September 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.
The National Chamber of Commerce Vs. State of Madras and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-30-1969
Reported in: [1970]25STC185(Mad)
K. Veeraswami, C.J.1. These petitions filed by the National Chamber of Commerce, Madras, impugned the validity of assessments of sales tax on transactions involving import by it of art silk, dyes and chemicals and distribution thereof to its members who held actual user's licence. The petitioner has registered itself as a dealer and would appear to have even collected sales tax from its members to whom distribution was made of the imported stuff. The department assessed the transactions not only on the basis of those facts but also on the view that the explanation to the definition of 'dealer' would apply, that is to say, a society or an association which, whether or not in the course of business, buys, sells, supplies or distributes goods from or to its members for cash, or for deferred payment, or for commission, remuneration or other valuable consideration, shall be deemed to be a dealer for the purposes of the Act. Reliance was also apparently placed on explanation (1) to the defin...
The Management of Southern Roadways (P.) Limited Vs. D. Venkateswarlu ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-29-1969
Reported in: (1971)1MLJ97
ORDERM.M. Ismail, J.1. These writ petitions arise out of a common order passed by the Labour Court, Madurai, in certain interlocutory applications filed by the petitioners herein in claim petitions preferred by the first respondent in W.P. No. 1736 of 1969 and the second respondent in each of the remaining writ petitions. All the petitioners are owners of motor transport undertakings coming within the scope of the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961 (Central Act XXVII of 1961) hereinafter referred to as 'the Act.' The first respondent in W.P. No. 1736 of 1969 has filed C.P. No. 287 of 1967 under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, claiming overtime wages. The second respondent in W.P. No. 1829 of 1969 has filed C.P. No. 399 of 1966 claiming difference in wages between the minimum wages payable to him and the wages actually paid to him. The second respondent in W.P. No. 1895 of 1969 has filed C.P. No. 240 of 1967 claiming washing allowance provided for under Section 10(...
S. Rangaraju Vs. Sulochana Ammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-26-1969
Reported in: AIR1971Mad280
1. The first defendant is the appellant in this Second Appeal. The Plaintiff has filed the suit under Section 77 of the Indian Registration Act for a decree directing the Registrar to register a document.2. The case of the plaintiff is that the first defendant (appellant) and the other three defendants constitute a joint family, that the defendants 1 to 3 and the first defendant as guardian of the fourth defendant executed a sale deed on 15-6-1961 for Rs. 4,000/- in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the suit property, that the first defendant received RS. 3,500/- at the time of the execution and the balance was reserved to be paid at the time of he registration. The plaintiff was put in possession of the suit property. The first defendant had come with the scribe from Dindigul to Alanganallur for executing the sale deed and the plaintiff paid Rs. 320/- to the first defendant for the purchase of the Stamp papers. After the first defendant executed the sale deed he demanded the consi...
Ramiah Chettiar Vs. K. Sankaralingam Pillai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-26-1969
Reported in: (1970)1MLJ483
ORDERS. Maharajan, J. 1. This petition is filed by the tenant to revise the order of the learned District Judge of Madurai, dismissing the revision petition filed by him under Section 25 of the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, (hereinafter referred to as the Act), against the order passed by the District Munsif, Tirumangalam in E.P. No. 57 of 1968 in R.C.O.P. No. 21 of 1963. The dispute between the parties arose under the following circumstances. The respondent-landlord filed an application for eviction against the tenant-petitioner under Section 10 (2) (i) of the Act on 8th August, 1963 before the Rent Controller. The ground alleged in the petition was that the tenant had committed wilful default in the payment of rent for the period 14th January, 1963 upto 16th July. On 19th October, 1963, the tenant, who had been served, with notice, appeared' in Court and made an endorsement to the following effect:The respondent hereby agrees that in future he will pay the peti...
K. Narayanaswami Reddiar Vs. T. Kolandaivelu Chettiar and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-24-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Mad267; 1970CriLJ980
Somasundaram, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned 6th Presidency Magistrate, Saidapet Madras in M. P. No. 32 of 1967 on his file declining to launch prosecution as requested by the appellant, against the respondents for offences under Sections 211 and 193 of the I. P. C, The appellant and the first respondent are, film financiers. The second respondent, Vallinayagam. wanted an amount of Rs. 25.000 for financing his productions. Respondent No. 1, Kolandaivelu Chettiar, who had already advanced amounts was short of money on a particular date and he advanced only Rs. 17,500. The appellant who was then present offered to pay the balance of Rs. 7,500 to the second respondent and for that purpose he requested the first respondent to execute a promissory note in favour of one Krishna-swamy Reddiar his nominee for Rupees 7,500. Believing his representations the promissory note was executed, but the amount was not paid. The promissory note was also not returned...
The Proprietor, Balasaraswathi Motor Works Vs. Employees' State Insura ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-24-1969
Reported in: (1970)IILLJ504Mad
ORDERT. Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. The appellant is a factory having its motor works at High Road, Tirunelveli Jn. The Manager of the Employees' State Insurance Corporation applied under Section 75(2) of the Employees' State Insurance Act 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act praying for the reckoning of the actual amounts due by the appellant to the Corporation, alter scrutiny of their records for the periods specified in the petition or for a direction to the appellant to pay an adhoc amount of Rs. 550 with interest at the prescribed rate and for other reliefs.2. The Corporation's case was that the appellant's factory is one which satisfies the requirements prescribed in the Act and, as such, the appellant is liable to contribute. The appellant's case was that his motor works was not a factory since the appellant was employing only 19 workers, and the necessary prerequisite obliging the appellant to contribute not being there, he claimed that the application was not maintainable, The n...
The Proprietor, Balasaraswathi Motor Works Vs. Employees State Insuran ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-24-1969
Reported in: (1970)2MLJ403
ORDERT. Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. The appellant is a factory having its motor works at High Road, Tirunelveli Junction. The Manager of the Employees State Insurance Corporation applied under Section 75 (2) of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (herein-after referred to as the Act) praying for the reckoning of the actual amounts due by the appellant to the Corporation, after scrutiny of their records for the periods specified in the petition or for a direction to the appellant to pay an ad hoc amount of Rs. 550 with interest at the prescribed rate and for other reliefs.2. The Corporation's case was that the appellant's factory is one which satisfies the requirements prescribed in the Act and as such, the appellant is liable to contribute. The appellant's case was that his motor works was not a factory since the appellant was employing only 19 workers, and the necessary pre-requisite obliging the appellant to contribute not being there, he claimed that the application was not maintainab...
K. Vadivelu and ors. Vs. the Official Liquidator, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-23-1969
Reported in: AIR1971Mad311
ORDER1. This application taken out by the plaintiffs in C. S. No. 230 of 1965 on the file of this court raises of important question of law under S. 446 of the Companies Act, 1956. The applicants are the sons of one Kolandayyappa Gounder, who is the second defendant in the suit. The first defendant Muthuswami Gounder is the father of Kolandayappa Gounder. The said two defendants started a business called Sri Murugan Oil Industries Private Ltd., Karur, and incurred loss. Some creditors of the company took out C. P. 23 of 1958 alleging that the company was insolvent and should be wound up. Overruling the objections on behalf of the company this court directed the winding up.Against that order the company preferred O. S. A. 62 of 1959. The appellate court dismissed the appeal confirming the order of winding up. The applicants, subsequent to the winding up order instituted O. S. No. 228 of 1964 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirapalli, impleading their father and grandfather an...
The Secretary, Revenue Dept. Govt. of Madras Vs. M.V. Savitri Ammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-23-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Mad471; (1970)2MLJ365
1. This is an appeal from a judgment of Ramamurti, J. In a suit by Originating Summons instituted by the respondent. Her husband, one M. G. Venugopal, died in 1949 leaving his last will and testament dated 6-9-1948. He had a daughter by name Kalvani by the respondent, but she died in 1955. The will is a cryptic one which reads:"I hereby bequeath all my immoveable properties wherever situate and moveable properties such as furniture, utensils, cash, bank deposit etc. to my wife Mrs. N. V. Savitri Ammal to be enjoyed by her during her lifetime and thereafter to my daughter Miss. M. V. Kalyani to be enjoyed by her during her lifetime without power of alienation. After the lifetime of my daughter Miss. M. V. Kalyani, the properties then remaining shall be absolutely enjoyed by the children of my daughter, to" be taken in equal shares. In the event of there being no children, male or female, to my daughter Miss. M. V. Kalyani, I give her the right to adopt a heir or heirs if she so desires,...
In Re: Abdul Khader
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-23-1969
Reported in: 1970CriLJ1321; (1970)1MLJ410
B.S. Somasundaram, J.1. Abdul Khadar, the appellant herein, stands convicted and sentenced by the Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri Division, at Krishnagiri, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years for an offence under Section 493 of the Indian Penal Code. Section 493 of the Indian Penal Code punishes persons who cohabit with a woman after deceitfully making a belief in her that she was legally married to him. The prosecution case was that on 16th January, 1967, the appellant by deceit, made P.W. 1 believe, that she was married to him and after creating such a belief in her mind, he made her cohabit with him. The defence of the appellant was one of denial. The learned Sessions Judge found that the appellant went through a form of marriage knowing that it was not the proper form and thereby deceived P.W. 1 and made her have sexual intercourse with him. The appellant is not a stranger to P.W. 1 because he is her cousin. He had given a new saree and ear ornaments to her. There was also an ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »