Chennai Court January 1971 Judgments
P.K. Sukumaran Vs. Sulaiman Khan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-29-1971
Reported in: AIR1971Mad454; (1971)1MLJ511
ORDER1. The petitioner herein filed a suit, O. S. No. 810 of 1968 for declaration of his title to certain trees and for an injunction restraining the respondent herein from cutting the said trees. After trial, the trail court decided the suit in favour of the petitioner and the operative portion of its judgment dated 22-10-1970 was as follows:'In the result, the plaintiff is entitled to declaration and injunction as prayed for provided he pays the contract amount on or before 23-11-1970. Failing which the suit will stand dismissed.'The petitioner however, did not pay the contract amount as directed on or before 23-11-1970. He, however, chose to file an application on 25-11-1970 under Sections 148 and 151 C. P. Code to extend the time for depositing the contract amount as per the decree dated 22-10-1970. That application has been dismissed by the lower court on the ground that the order has worked itself out as a result of which the suit stands dismissed, and that it had no power to ext...
Tag this Judgment!The Common Wealth Assurance Co. Ltd., Bombay Vs. V.P. Rahim Khan Sahib ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-29-1971
Reported in: AIR1971Mad415; [1971]41CompCas727(Mad)
1. The Common Wealth Assurance Co, Ltd. Bombay, has preferred this appeal against the order passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chingleput, in M.O.P. No. 46 of 1966 directing the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- as compensation to the respondents who are the legal representatives of the deceased Shamsir Khan.2. On 17-5-1966 the lorry involved in the accident and which belonged to one Nagarathinam the first respondent before the Claims Tribunal was engaged by Shamsir Khan for transporting mangoes from Vellore to Madras. On the way at about 2 or 3 A. M. on 18-5-1966 the lorry capsized due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver who is said to have slept away while he was driving the vehicle at good speed. As a result Shamsir Khan was thrown out and was killed.3. The respondents who are the legal representatives of the deceased have filed the application in question under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of the sum of Rs. 15,000...
Tag this Judgment!Chockanathan Chit Fund and Finance (P) Ltd., Pondicherry and ors. Vs. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-29-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Mad99
1. The petitioners in each of the above writ petitions are companies or firms conducting chit funds of all classes in the State of Pondicherry and the present writ petitions are for the issue of a writ of Mandamus restraining the Union Territory of Pondicherry from enforcing the provisions of the Punditry Chit Funds Act 1966. Under the Constitution (Fourteenth Amendment) Act, 1962, Pondicherry was constituted as a Union territory and de jure transfer of Pondicherry State to the Indian Union was made on 16-8-1962. The Legislative Assembly of the Union Territory of Pondicherry constituted under Section 18 of the Government of Union Territory Act 1963, has made the Pondicherry Chit Funds Act 1966 which received the assent of the President on 14-2-1967 and became law on 1-10-1967. The provisions of the said Act were enforced and the present writ petitions are filed for the aforesaid relief.2. All the petitions are of the same pattern and we shall take up the allegations in W. P. 1068 of 19...
Tag this Judgment!Murasoli Maran Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-29-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Mad40; (1971)2MLJ57
1. The writ appeal and writ petition raise a common question as to the validity of the President's Order dated 27-4-1960, a Circular of the Ministry of Home Affairs, dated 3-3-1966, and the memoranda of the Railway Board as well as of the Posts and telegraphs, dated respectively 27-6-1969 and 19-6-1968. The writ petition out of which this writ appeal arises, was filed by a Member of the Parliament. Although Alagiriswami, J., held that the Circular orders contravened S. 3(4) of the Official Language (Amendment) Act, 1967, he dismissed the petition on the ground that it was for persons aggrieved to approach the court in a proper case, and not for persons like the petitioner who had no personal interest in the matter. The learned Judge was further of opinion that he could not accept the contention that the Presidential Order became void because no second Language Commission was appointed as contemplated by Article 344 of the Constitution, but he felt that quite possibly the petitioner may...
Tag this Judgment!Mayavaram Financial Corporation Ltd. and ors. Vs. Reserve Bank of Indi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-29-1971
Reported in: [1971]41CompCas890(Mad)
Raghavan J. 1. These three writ petitions are filed by the three chit fund companies for the issue of a writ of mandamus restraining the Reserve Bank of India (1st respondent) from enforcing the provisions of the Non-Banking--Financial Companies (Reserve Bank) Directions, 1966, framed under Sections 45J to 45L of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934. The petitioners are companies carrying on business as foreman of chits. The allegations in each of the writ petitions are of the same pattern and we shall take up the allegations in W.P. No. 1126 of 1967. The scheme of working of chits as set out by the petitioners in their affidavits is as follows:A number of persons called subscribers join together undertaking to subscribe a certain sum of money at stated intervals for a certain period. The aggregate of the sums payable by all the subscribers in one instalment is called the capital of the chit. The prize amount is ascertained by auctioning the fund among the subscribers or by draw. After ...
Tag this Judgment!G. Jayakumar Vs. R. Ramaratnam
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-29-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Mad212
ORDER1. In O. P. No. 234 of 1970, one Jayakumar prays for permission to prove in common form the Will of one Amaravathi Ammal and for the grant of probate in his favour.2. Amaravathi Ammal, who was 83 years old at the time of the execution of the Will dated 14-4-1969 is said to have died on 6-7-1970. Under the Will, she is alleged to have bequeathed her properties worth over Rs. 65000 in favour of the petitioner Jayakumar, who belongs to a different community from that of the testatrix. It is also alleged that under the Will the petitioner has been appointed as the sole executor of the testatrix.3. After publication in the papers one Sundarammal and one Ramaratnam have entered caveat. In her affidavit in support of her caveat, Sundarammal says that the deceased testatrix was her paternal aunt and that upon the death of the testatrix, have inherited her estate as her heirs-at-law. She also contests the truth and validity of the Will and contends that the testatrix had no testamentary ca...
Tag this Judgment!The Salem-dharmapuri Omnibus Operators Association Vs. the Secretary t ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-29-1971
Reported in: (1971)2MLJ273
ORDERK. Veeraswami, C.J.1. These are two sets of petitions for quashing two notifications of the State Government G.O. Ms. No. 923, Home, dated 19th April, 1969 and G.O. Ms. No. 434, Home, dated 27th February, 1970. They were issued in exercise of the powers conferred by subsection (1) of Section 17 of the Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1931, as amended. By these notifications, rules were made amending Schedules II and III to the Act and the amendments have been approved by the Legislative Assembly as required by Sub-section (3) of Section 17 of the Act. The first of the notifications increased the rate of tax in respect of contract carriages, from Rs. 30 to Rs. 50 per passenger seat per quarter, and the second from Rs. 50 to Rs. 100. The petitioners are individual omnibus operators in some of them and the Salem-Dharmapuri Omnibus Operators Association is one of the petitioners. They assail the validity of the notifications on the main ground that they constitute an improper e...
Tag this Judgment!The Mayavaram Financial Corporation Limited and ors. Vs. the Reserve B ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-29-1971
Reported in: (1973)2MLJ72
V.V. Raghavan, J.1. These three writ petitions are filed by three Chit Fund Companies for the issue of a writ of mandamus restraining the Reserve Bank of India (1st respondent) from enforcing the provisions of the Non-Banking Financial Companies (Reserve Bank) Directions, 1966, framed under Sections 45-J to 45-L of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934. The petitioners are companies carrying on business as foreman of chits. The allegations in each of the writ petitions are of the same pattern and we shall take up the allegations in W.P. No. 1126 of 1967. The scheme of working of chits as set out by the petitioners in their affidavits is as follows:2. A number of persons called subscribers join together undertaking to subscribe a certain sum of money at stated intervals for a certain period. The aggregate of the sums payable by all the subscribers in one instalment is called the capital of the chit. The prize amount is ascertained by auctioning the fund among the subscribers or by draw. A...
Tag this Judgment!A. Subbaiah Padayachi Vs. State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-27-1971
Reported in: AIR1971Mad417; (1971)2MLJ324
ORDER1. The petitioner herein held 1.521/2 acres of land in his own name and his minor sons held an extent of 6.78 acres. The petitioner was cultivating on lease an extent of 4.51 acres belonging to a third party. The Authorised Officer clubbed all the three items and proposed to declare the said leasehold extent of 4.51 acres being in excess of the cultivating tenant's ceiling area as fixed under Section 60 of Madras Act 58 of 1961. The petitioner contended before the Authorised Officer that he is in possession of only 1.521/2 acres as owner and that the extent of 6.78 acres belonging to his minor sons cannot be clubbed with his extent for the purpose of fixing the cultivating tenant's ceiling area under Ch. VIII of the Act. But this objection was overruled by the Authorised Officer and he held that as the minor sons who held an extent of 6.78 acres are members of the petitioner's family, as defined in Section 3 (14), the aggregate holding in the hands of all the minors have to be tak...
Tag this Judgment!State by Public Prosecutor and Vs. Karuppanna thevar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-25-1971
Reported in: (1972)1MLJ26
K.N. Mudaliyar, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the State against the acquittal of the four accused-respondents for an offence under Section 302, read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code.2. (For the sake of convenience we shall refer to the respondents as the accused hereinafter).3. There is a village called Panaiyur where Thevars are the residents predominantly and where Chettiars also reside. There have been civil actions and criminal proceedings between the parties. There is evidence that Andar Chettiar (deceased) was taking a leading part in the litigation between the parties. Aggrieved at the conduct of Andar Chettiar, the case of the prosecution is, accused 1 to 4 who are Thevars made a sudden appearance near the well inside the nanja land of one Ramaswami Chettiar at about midnight (or past midnight) of 6/7th February, 1969 and caused his death.4. A week prior to the death of Andar Chettiar, on a Friday night when P.W. 5 was talking to Andar Chettiar (deceased) about some civil c...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »