Chennai Court September 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.
The Management of Sri Sivasakthi Bus Service Vs. P. Gopal and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-16-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Mad434; (1971)2MLJ83
ORDER1. The petitioner is the Management of Sri Siva Sakthi Bus Service. south Arcot Dt. The first respondent was a conductor in the service of the petitioner. One Sivalingam Chettiar was proprietor of the service. When he was alive, Alangarm Chettiar was the power of attorney agent conducting the affairs of the service. After the death of Sivalingam Chettiar, Alangaram Chettiar continued to act for the petitioner, and, as it will be shown presently, his acts were ratified by the legal representatives of the late Sivalingam Chettiar. There was a dispute between the petitioner and its workers which resulted in an industrial dispute; but the same was ultimately settled. During the pendency of the dispute, certain charges were framed against the first respondent and the charge memo was issued by Alangaram Chettiar. Interalia it is necessary to notice only the following three charges:'1. On 28-8-1967 the first respondent who was doing duty in M.D.F. 3385 collected fares from 5 passengers b...
The Accommodation Controller, Madras Vs. G. Rukmani Ammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-15-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Mad342
1. The writ appeal raises a short point as to whether the occupation referred to in S. 3(10)(c) of the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act should be actual physical occupation all the time. The respondent was occupying a portion of the building belonging to her, the rest of the portion being under tenancy. On termination of the tenancy in once portion of the first floor. the Accommodation Controller, purporting to act under Section 3(3), allotted that portion to a tenant of his nomination. He declined to give effect to Section (10)(c), though his attention was drawn to it. Srinivasan J, quashed this order.2. The learned Judge proceeded upon the footing that the petitioner herself was in occupation of a portion of the building. Before us, it is stated that it is not she but her daughter who lived in that portion. But we think that such occupation may well fall within the purview of Section 3(10)(c). Alagiriswami J. held the view in W. P. No. 2734 of 1969 (Mad) that when the se...
R.M. Seshadri Vs. K.K. Chari
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-15-1970
Reported in: (1971)1MLJ90
G. Ramanujam, J.1. This revision arises out of an application filed by the petitioner (tenant) against the order of the lower Court refusing to recall a warrant of possession issued in E.P. No. 953 of 1969 on its file. The facts leading to this revision may briefly be stated.2. The respondent herein filed H.R.C. No. 983 of 1968 for evicting the petitioner on the ground that he required premises No. 64, Lloyds Road, Madras bona fide for his own personal occupation. The petitioner contended inter alia that the alleged requirement of the building for owner's occupation is not bona fide that the respondent's purchase from the original owner, Indian Academy of Science, on 23rd October, 1967 was not valid as the premises was inalienable being a trust property. The petition was finally taken up for hearing on 16th January, 1969, when the respondent as P.W. 1 was examined and Exhibits P-1 to P-3 were marked. The enquiry was continued on 25th January, 1969 and 22nd February, 1969 when P.W. 1 wa...
M.P. Tahilramani Vs. the Kalakshetra, Represented by Its President, Sm ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-14-1970
Reported in: (1971)1MLJ59
G. Ramanujam, J.1. This revision is directed against the order of the lower Court rejecting an application, I.A. No. 117 of 1970 filed by the petitioner under Sections 8 and 33 of the Arbitration Act seeking a reference of the disputes involved in A.S. No. 66 of 1969 on the file of the lower Court to two named arbitrators. The lower Court rejected the said application in the following circumstances.2. The respondent herein instituted O.S. No. 449 of 1965 on the file of the District Munsif's Court, Poonamallee for eviction of the petitioner herein and for recovery of arrears of rent as also future damages for use and occupation. The said suit was transferred to the file of the District Munsif, Kancheepuram and renumbered as O.S. No. 772 of 1967. The petitioner contested the suit on various grounds but the trial Court rejected his defence and decreed the suit with costs as prayed for. The petitioner thereafter filed the said A.S. No. 66 of 1969 before the lower Court against the decree a...
Srinivasa Perumal and ors. Vs. Sellapapammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-14-1970
Reported in: (1971)1MLJ194
ORDERB.S. Somasundaram, J.1. This revision by the unsuccessful party in a proceeding under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code, is directed against the orders passed hy the Additional First Glass Magistrate, Kulitalai, in M.G. No. 166 of 1969 on his file. The dispute related to the right to take water from a well in S.F. No. 124/7 situate at Chitlarai, a village, Musiri Taluk, in Trichy District. The eastern portion in this survey field is owned by the respondent. The western portion belongs to the petitioners and there is no dispute that both are entitled to take water from this well to their respective portions by turns. The petitioners claimed a right to take the watei for another field viz., Section No. 124/3, which they had taken on lease from someone else. Disputes arose. There was likelihood of the breach of the peace. The Revenue Divisional Officer at Musiri issued the pieliminary order under Section 145(1) of the Criminal Procedme Code, on the 17th of March, 1969. By this ord...
K.V. Subbiah Vs. T. Chalapathi Rao
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-14-1970
Reported in: (1971)2MLJ246
ORDERB.S. Somasundaram, J.1. The petitioner herein (who is the same in both these revision petitions) was the Managing Partner of the firm 'Janaranjani Films' at Madras. The respondent and another Suryanarayana were the other two partners. Clause 15 of the partnership agreement provided that all monies belonging to the firm should be remitted into a scheduled Bank viz., the Andhra Bank at T. Nagar, by all the partners. On 10th July, 1968, a cheque for Rs. 2,000 on the Bank of Baroda was issued in favour of the aforesaid firm by Messrs. Ramalakshmi Movies, who had entered into an agreement for exploiting a picture in the City of Madras. The respondent received this cheque, affixed his signature as partner of Janaranjani Films, had it attested by the Andhra Bank at T. Nagar and cashed the same at the Bank of Baroda. He did not remit the amount, but misappropriated the same. Similarly, he had misappropriated another amount of Rs. 10,000 which he had collected from one Rayala Films at Vija...
The Director of School Education Government of Tamil Nadu and anr. Vs. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-10-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Mad440; (1971)1MLJ325
1. This appeal is from an order of Alagiriswami J. by which he allowed the respondent's petition to quash G. O. Ms. 767 (Education) dated 10-6-1969. The learned Judge held that the impugned order was violative of Art. 30(1) of the Constitution. We are of the view that the learned Judge was right.2. The respondent is the Correspondent of Christhuraja Basic Training School, Palayamcottai, and represents the Society of the Brothers of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, Palayamcottai. The Christhuraja Basic Training School is one of several schools run by the Society. The Society consists of members professing the Roman Catholic faith among whose objects, as it is said, is promotion of education by establishing and administering schools and colleges. The Society says that members professing that faith and belonging to the Society are a minority community within the meaning of Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India. That this, is so is not id dispute. It is also not in controversy that the Soci...
M. Avanashiappa Gounder Vs. K.C.P. Muthulakshmi Ammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-10-1970
Reported in: (1971)1MLJ37
G. Ramanujam, J.1. There was a suit, O.S. No. 134 of 1959, on the file of the Sub-Court, Coimbatore for partition filed by one Patulinga Nataraja Gounder against his father and his two brothers claiming certain properties as joint family properties and seeking a partition and separate possession of his share. In that suit the appellant herein was appointed as an Arbitrator and he submitted his Award to the Court along with three documents an account book and also two statements given by one K.S. Ramaswami Gounder and K.S. Palaniswami Gounder who were the grand-father and grand-uncle respectively of the plaintiff. The Court passed a decree on the basis of the said Award on 26th March, i960. The said K.S. Ramaswami Gounder, who gave one of the statements before the Arbitrator died on nth September, 1965. On 18th September, 1965, the appellant filed an application to the Court for the return of the documents submitted along with the Award on the ground that he has to return the same to th...
S.P. Mohammad Vs. the Commissioner of Land Revenue, Board of Revenue ( ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-09-1970
Reported in: (1971)1MLJ26
ORDERT. Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. The petitioner who is a citizen of India, applied for the grant of a licence to possess a revolver and made the prescribed statements therefor to the licensing authority, namely, the 2nd respondent, under the provisions of the Arms Act of 1959 and Rules made thereunder. It is not disputed that the application contained the necessary particulars to be furnished under the Act and Rules. The petitioner's requirement of the arm was based on personal reasons and grounds. He is a resident of George Town, Madras. His factory is at Thiruvottiyur village within Chingleput District. There is man force of 200 strong employed in the said factory. The petitioner carries daily a sum of Rs. 2,000 in cash for the purpose of his business. As he was apprehensive of his personal safety and safety of money, he made the necessary application for licence for keeping a fire Arm. The 2nd Respondent, by his order dated 30th June, 1969, made a laconic order to the effect:The applic...
In Re: Devakumar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-03-1970
Reported in: (1972)1MLJ200
B.S. Somasundaram, J.1. The first two appellants are brothers. The other two appellants are their sisters. They were residing at No. 2, Aheyapuram First Street, Kodambakkam, which is at a distance of 50 yards from the Nehru Nursery-School. The first two were prosecuted under Section 3 (1) and the other two under Section 7 (1) of the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls' Act. The prosecution arose in the following circumstances. P.W. 5, Thiru Pappa, the Assistant Commissioner-raw-Special Officer under the Suppression of Immoral Traffic Act had information that the appellants were running a brothel at their aforesaid residence. He made arrangements for a trap on the evening of 17th August, 1968. P.W. 4, a pawnbroker, residing in De Mello's Road, Perambur Barracks, was fixed as a decoy. M.O. 1 series (five 10 rupee currency notes) were entrusted to him with instructions to accompany the informant to the brothel house and to have sexual intercourse, after payment of the amount...