Chennai Court April 1971 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.
Pappi Chetty Raghaviah Chetty's Charities by Its President vs. the com ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Mad139; (1967)2MLJ413
1. This petition is filed by Pappu Chetty Raghavaiah Chetty's Charities by its President P. Manavala Chetty to issue a writ of certiorari calling for the papers: relating to the proceedings of the Commissioner of Labour, Madras and to quash his order dated 9th February, 1967. The petitioner is a charitable institution founded by one Pappu Chetty Raghavaiah Chetty under a Deed of Trust dated 24th July, 1912 The trust owns 12 items of outstanding secured on mortgages and pledges and unsecured debts. The charities also maintain a kalyana koodam which is being let out for the auspicious functions like marriage to Brahmins and Vaisyas. For allowing the use of kalyana koodam, the charities collect a fee of Rs. 35 per day and for the use of utensils a fee of Rs. 40 is charged for two to four days, in addition to the rent of the building. When the kalayana koodam is let out, a levy at the rate of 75 paise per unit is charged towards electricity supply. The charities realised a sum of Rs. 3,300...
The Management of Madras Vs. the Workmen of Madras and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-1971
Reported in: (1972)1MLJ117
K. Veeraswami, C.J.1. The appeal arises from an order of Kailasam, J., holding that the appellant, the Madras Pinjrapole, was an industry within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act. The petition was to quash an award of the Presiding Officer, Additional Labour Court, Madras. At the instance of some of the employees of the Madras Pinjrapole, the State Government, by an order, dated 22nd September, 1958, made a reference to the Presiding Officer for adjudication of four issues relating to fixation of scales of pay, quantum of dearness allowance, termination of the services of certain workmen and computation of relief in terms of money, if it could be so computed. A preliminary issue was raised whether the Pinjrapole was an industry in order to view the dispute as an industrial dispute. On that issue, the Presiding Officer held that having regard to the wide and comprehensive import of the definition of the word 'industry' in the Act and the, evidence on record read with the decide...
K. Jagan Mohan Rao Vs. K. Swarup
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-1971
Reported in: (1972)2MLJ77
G. Ramanujam, J.1. This appeal arises out of a petition filed by the respondent herein under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights. The appellant herein married the respondent in March, 1955, and they lived together at Narasaraopet from March, 1955, to the middle of 1957. As the respondent became pregnant, she was taken to Madras by the appellant and was left with her parents for confinement. She delivered a still-born child on 10th August, 1957. The respondent thereafter joined the appellant at Guntur by the end of 1967 where she lived with him till about May, 1-958. In May, 1958, the appellant went on leave and took the respondent to Madras and after leaving her with her parents, he went away to Salur, his native place to attend to a litigation concerning his family house. On the expiry of the leave, the appellant was posted to Srikakulam where the respondent joined him in November, 1958. In June, 1959, the appellant was promoted from Supervisor to As...
Union of India and anr. Vs. M. Mariaprakasa Mudaliar Sons Karur
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-19-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Mad140
1. The defendant in O. S. 295 of 1963 on the file of the court of the District Munsif, Karur, who failed before the trial court as well as the first appellate court are the appellants before this court. The facts necessary for the purpose of appreciating the question that arise for consideration in this second appeal are as follows:--The respondent herein, which is a firm, doing handloom business at Karur, despatched handloom goods to Gauhati under Parcel Way bill dated 7-4-1962. The bales were booked by the respondent "for selves" with 1054 and 1055 as their numbers for identification purposes. According to the respondent. the value of the goods as per its invoice came to Rs. 1650. On 6-9-1962, the respondent requested the Station Master at Gauhati to rebook the goods to Karur railway station enclosing the original parcel way bill to him and the receipt of the same was acknowledged on 11-9-1962, by the Station Master. But in spite of reminders in that behalf to the station master, the...
Wheel and Rim Company of India Ltd. Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu and a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-19-1971
Reported in: (1971)IILLJ299Mad
ORDERPalaniswamy, J.1. The short question that arises for consideration in this case is whether an employee, dismissed from service on any one of the grounds enumerated in Section 9 of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965, (hereinafter referred to as the Act), is disentitled to receive bonus payable only for the accounting year in which the order of dismissal is passed or is disentitled to receive whatever bonus was remaining unpaid on the date of the order of dismissal. The relevant facts are these. Chandran, the second respondent was under the employment of the petitioner-company as cashier. On the allegation that he was guilty of theft, fraud and dishonesty in connection with the business and property of the company, he was dismissed from service with effect from 11th November, 1969. For the year 1966, the petitioner-company declared a bonus of 27 per cent. That was declared by reason of the settlement dated 14-10-1967 entered into between the petitioner and the Simpson and Group Company ...
Pichaimuthu Vs. Winner Knitting Co.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-19-1971
Reported in: 1972CriLJ91
K.N. Mudaliyar, J. 1. This appeal is directed by the complainant Pichaimuthu Manager. Messrs. Champion Knitting Company, Tiruppur, against the order of acquittal of the respondent-accused. Winner Knitting Company, of an offence under Section 78 (b) of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act (43 Central Act of 1958). The respondent was convicted by the Sub Divisional Magistrate. Erode, for an offence under Section 78 (b) of the said Act and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-.2. The learned Counsel for the appellant contended that when the Criminal Appeal No. 212/68 was heard by the Court of Session there was no notice to the appellant, particularly when he was the complainant, principally interested in the matter. His argument is that during the stage of the hearing of the appeal, he ought to have been given notice of the appeal before the Court of Session by the accused-respondent. Such a notice has been lacking in this case and, therefore, the appellant, offices of the public prosecutor...
Appavu Gramani and anr. Vs. N. Jayalakshmi Ammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-16-1971
Reported in: (1971)2MLJ296
ORDERV.V. Raghavan, J.1. The tenants of the shop bearing No. 153-B/ 1, Tiruvottiyur High Road, are the petitioners. The landlord-respondent filed H.R. C. No. 1729 of 1967 under Section 14 (1) (b) of the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960. The allegations in the petition are that the respondent is a purchaser of the premises in November, 1966, that the shop is more than 40 years old, built of country bricks and that the recent cyclone made the condition of the shop worse, that the building requires immediate demolition and erection of a new building in its place. In order to show his bona fides the landlord has undertaken to erect a new building within three months of demolition. The tenancy was duly determined by notice in writing and as the tenants failed to comply with the demand the present application was filed. The tenant opposed the application contending that the petition is not bona fide that the shop is not in a dilapidated state, that the sanction from the Co...
Ramaswami Gounder Vs. Ramaswami Gounder and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-16-1971
Reported in: (1972)1MLJ417
K.S. Venkataraman, J.1. These appeals arise out of a suit (O.S. No. 184 of 1964) filed before the learned Subordinate Judge of Cuddalore for partition of the estate of one Koneri Goundar, who died on or about 8th July, 1926. The plaintiff claims that on 5th July, 1926, Koneri Goundar left his last Will (Registration Copy is Exhibit A-4). After bequeathing two items to his cousin Narayanaswamy (P.W. 2) and the Mariamman Temple, he bequeathed half of the remaining properties to the plaintiff, his sister's son. He bequeathed the remaining half to three persons: (i) Muthuthandava Goundar, son of another elder sister of his, Poornammal; (ii) Natesa Goundar, son of another sister of his, Yasothammal; and (iii) Ramaswamy Goundar, son of his wife's sister, Balammal. The three were to take equally. The Will was to be given effect to after the life-time of the testator and Sowbagyammel, wife of the testator. The plaintiff construes this as a life estate given to Sowbagyammal without powers of al...
K.P. Arthanariswamy Chettiar and ors. Vs. First Income-tax Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-15-1971
Reported in: [1972]84ITR51(Mad)
Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. These writ petitions raise a common question. It is agreed that if the facts in Writ Petition No. 2071 of 1968 are noticed, it is sufficient to deal with the contentions raised by the counsel before us in these writ petitions. For the assessment year 1962-63, along with his return of income, the petitioner filed a statement of creditors together with details of interest payment, etc. In the said statement filed by him, he represented that he borrowed a sum of Rs. 50,000 from M/s. Gordhandas Mulchand, Bankers, Salem, and that he paid interest of Rs. 1,155 thereon. A note was appended to the statement, as also to the return, by a chartered accountant, supporting the entry and the borrowing. The Income-tax Officer, on such material and facts placed before him, completed the assessment and accepted that the above sum of Rs. 50,000 was a genuine borrowing made by the petitioner in the course of business and that the interest paid thereon was susceptible to allowance un...
Southern Textiles Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer, City Circle I(2), Coimt ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-15-1971
Reported in: [1972]83ITR790(Mad)
The judgment of the court was delivered byRAMAPRASADA RAO J. - The petitioner is a limited company incorporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act and is having its office at Coimbatore. It placed certain orders with Messrs. Textool company Ltd., Coimbatore, for the supply of ring frames and machinery according to certain noted specifications. The term agreed upon between the petitioner on the one hand and Messrs. Textool Company Ltd. On the other, inter alia, were that sum of Rs. 35,000 should be paid as advance and the balance against the arrival of invoices; a stipulated time of delivery was prescribed and that erection should be carried out by Messrs. Textool Company Ltd. free of cost. We are not extracting or referring to the other terms of the contract as they are not relevant. It is common ground that Messrs. Textool Company Ltd. supplied certain machinery which is characterised by the petitioner as five ring frames. The further case of the petitioner is that, ther...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »