Chennai Court April 1970 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.
B. Belli Gowder Vs. B. Govindan and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-30-1970
Reported in: (1970)2MLJ303
ORDERG. Ramanujam, J.1. This revision is directed against the appellate order of the Additional District Judge of Coimbatore in C.M.A. No. 389 of 1968 dismissing an appeal filed by the petitioner against the order passed by the Sub-Court of Ootacamund in. I.A. No. 49 of 1966 refusing to set aside a sale conducted by the Official Receiver of the insolvent's property. The petitioner herein was a lessee of the property which was sold by the Official Receiver. The petitioner filed the above I.A. No. 49 of 1966 on the file of the Sub-Court, Ootacamund, on the ground that the sale conducted by the Official Receiver was vitiated for two reasons (1) that the sale was conducted without notice to him as lessee in possession of the property sold and (2) that there was no sufficient publication so as to attract the highest bid. The ?Courts below have taken the view that the petitioner herein is not an aggrieved person so as to entitle him to file an application under Section 68 of the Provincial I...
In Re: Deepchand
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-30-1970
Reported in: (1970)2MLJ253
K.N. Mudaliyar, J.1. The appellant seeks to file this appeal against his conviction for an offence under Section 411, Indian Penal Code (two counts). In brief the facts proved by the prosecution are mentioned here below.2. In February, 1968 there was a theft in the house of P.W. 2. A ceiling fan (M.O. 2), a brass drum (M.O. 3), a brass Kudam (M.O. 4), a brass Thavalai (M.O.5) a brass box (M.O. 6), a brass Adukku (M.O. 7) a brass Dabba (M.O. 8), two brass Adukkus (M.O. 9 series) a brass Chombu (M.O. 10), a brass plate (M.O. 11), twenty items of eversilver utensils (M.O. 12 series) an eversilver Kuthu-Vilakku (M.O. 13), an eversilver soap box (M.O. 14) and an electric table light (M.O. 15) were stolen from the house by P.W. 4 who later sold the stolen articles, in addition to a silver plate and two eversilver articles, to the appellant for a sum of Rs. 75. The prosecution claims that M.Os. 2 to 15 were worth more than Rs. 300. The appellant promised to make a further payment of some more...
In Re: Kandhapadayachi Alias Kandaswami
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-29-1970
Reported in: (1970)2MLJ371
K.S. Venkataraman, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge of South Arcot, by which he convicted the appellant herein, Kanda Padayachi under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for committing the murder of one Natesa Padayachi, by delivering cuts on him, on the night of 10th July, 1969, (Thursday) in Valayamadevi Village, and sentenced him to the extreme penalty of the law, subject to confirmation by this Court.2. Natesa Padayachi (deceased) and his wife Meenakshi (P.W. 1) were residing originally in Neyveli Road, just north of the house of the appellant. The appellant's wife died three years before, and he had no children. The appellant developed illicit intimacy with P.W. 1 about seven months prior to the occurrence. One afternoon, about four months prior to the occurrence, the children of Natesa Padayachi were not in the house. Natesa Padayachi happened to return home earlier and discovered his wife and the appellant in a compromising position. Nat...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. K.S. Ratnaswamy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-24-1970
Reported in: [1970]78ITR303(Mad)
Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras, and on a direction by this court, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench, has referred to us the following questions of law and stated to us the case thereof:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was non-resident? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that there was no liability to penalty under Section 28(1)(a)?' 2. The facts are as follows: Subramania Kadavirar and Arumuga Kadavirar were brothers. The assessee and two others, Ganapathi and Velayudam, were the sons of Subramania, and Ganesa is the only son of Arumuga. After the death of Subramania and Arumuga their sons formed a Hindu undivided family. But it is admitted that Subramania himself was born and bred in Ceylon and so is the assessee. The assessee has his own business in Ceylon and has properties ther...
M.S. Sambamurti Sastriar and ors. Vs. the Deputy Registrar of Co-opera ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-23-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Mad343
ORDER1. The first petitioner is the Secretary, the second petitioner is the Assistant Secretary, the third Petitioner is the President, the fourth petitioner is the Vice-President, and the fifth petitioner is a Director of the Arni Co-operative Stores, Arni. Proceedings were taken under Section 71 of the Madras Co-operative Societies Act. Madras Act 53 of 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for surcharging these persons. The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Ranipet, by his order dated 9-7-1966 directed the various petitioner herein to restore a sum of Rs. 60,634-77 jointly and severally to the assets of the Arni Co-operative Stores, Arni, by way of compensation under the said section. Against this order of the Deputy Registrar, the petitioners herein preferred appeals to the second respondent herein, namely, the Appellate Tribunal, constituted under S. 95 of the Act. That Tribunal, by an order dated 24th September, 1968, set aside the order of the Deputy Registrar and ...
Secretary, Engineering Metal and Vs. the Management of Mysore Premier ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-23-1970
Reported in: (1970)IILLJ381Mad
ORDERAlagiriswami, J.1. This petition is filed by the workers' union representing the employees of the second respondent company to quash the award of the Industrial Tribunal, Madras, in I.D. No. 42 of 1967. The dispute referred to the Tribunal was in relation to the demand of the workers for additional bonus for the years 1964 and 1965. The employer has disbursed a 4 per cent bonus for the year 1965. The dispute with regard to the bonus for 1964 his been settled by means of an agreement. The workers claimed that for the year 1965, if the provisions of the Payment of Bonus Act were applied, they would be entitled to a 20 per cent bonus. The main basis of this claim was that the management had earned a profit of Rs. 12,08,304 as a result of the sale of an import entitlement and that this represented a revenue receipt and should have been taken into account in calculating the available surplus. The management contended that the receipts from the transfer of import entitlements were recei...
Kumaravel Pillai Vs. S. Ganapathi and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-22-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Mad216
1. This Letters Patent appeal is directed against the order of Gokulakrishnan J. in proceedings arising under the Indian Lunacy Act, 1912. The relative facts may briefly be stated for a proper appreciation of the various aspects arising in this appeal.One Balakrishna Pillai died long ago possessed of properties leaving behind him two widows Meenakshi and Sornathachi and a daughter Visalakshi. Sornathachi dies in 1944 and Meenakshi died earlier. Visalakshi was a person of unsound mind. Her husband predeceased her. Her husband's brother on Natarajan applied for himself being appointed as the lunatic's guardian and manager under the Lunacy Act. This was in O. P. No. 69 of 1944 on the file of the District Court, Tiruchirapalli. He was removed by court as such guardian on 9th June 1955 and in his place, Kumaravelu, the lunatic's mother's brother's grandson the appellant here, was appointed as the manager of the lunatic's estate.At this stage one Devasenathipathi claiming himself to be the a...
The Trichinopoly Mining Works (P.) Ltd. Vs. the Collector of Tiruchira ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-22-1970
Reported in: (1971)1MLJ207
ORDERM.M. Ismail, J.1. Writ Petition No. 852 of 1969 challenges the validity of and the levy of local cess under Section 115 of the Madras Panchayats Act (XXXV of 1958) (hereinafter referred to as the Act), while Writ Petition No. 853 of 1969, filed by the same petitioner challenges the levy of local cess surcharge under Section 116 of the same Act. The petitioner is a ryotwari pattadar of an extent of 259.73 acres of land with, reference to which the petitioner has obtained a lease or licence from the Government for mining. Similarly, in respect of another extent of land of which admittedly the Government is the owner, by different lease deeds entered into, between the Government and the petitioner, the petitioner has obtained the right to mine gypsum. The petitioner was called upon to pay local cess under Section 115 of the Act in respect of the lands covered by the leases granted by the Government relating to the lands of which the petitioner is a pattadar as well as the lands of wh...
K. Kamakshi Vs. K. Mani
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-22-1970
Reported in: (1970)2MLJ477
K. Veeraswami, C.J.1. This appeal by the respondent arises from a petition filed by the husband for restitution of conjugal rights. It is not disputed that the marriage took place according to Hindu rites at Bombay on 27th October, 1960, and that soon thereafter they lived together happily for a short while. But thereafter unfortunately they were separated which eventually led to the petition. The defence was that the parties were within the prohibited degrees of relationship, they being the children of brother and sister. It appears the husband's mother and the wife's father are sister and brother respectively. She pleaded that according to the custom and usage of the Dravida Brahmin Community to which the husband's father as well as the wife's father belonged, marriage of cousins was prohibited. On that basis she claimed that she was entitled to a declaration of the nullity of the marriage. The parties went to trial essentially on the question whether there was a custom allowing such...
T.V. Sundaram Iyengar and Sons (P) Ltd. Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu an ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-21-1970
Reported in: (1970)IILLJ445Mad
ORDERVeeraswami, C.J.1. These appeals arise from a common order of Kailasam, J., dismissing two petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, one to quash the order of the Government dated 6th July, 1967 referring for adjudication an industrial dispute under Section (1)(c) read with Section 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, and the other to prohibit the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, from proceeding with the adjudication.2. The third respondent was employed by the appellant as an apprentice from 1st May, 1964, for a period of twelve months, After completion of the apprenticeship, the third respondnot was appointed as a probationer under a fresh engagement as probationary technical Assistant with effect from 1st May, 1965. His probation was, however, terminated by order dated 3rd February 1966, after an enquiry into a certain charge of misconduct against him. On 31st December, 1966, the Labour Officer, Tirunelveli, sent his conciliation report, in the light of which the State Gove...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »