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.
Chokkan Palani Vilas Vs. the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-13-1971
Reported in: (1973)ILLJ139Mad
ORDERK.S. Palaniswami, J.1. The petitioner, a partnership-firm, prays for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to enforce the provisions of the Employees Provident Funds Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) under the following circumstances. The petitioner-firm, said to have been started 25 years ago, is manufacturing snuff. Its factory is situated at Adidravidan Street at Kamuthi, Ramanathapuram District. The firm has also a shop at Nadar Bazar, Kamuthi. On 21st November, 1968, the petitioner-firm furnished some particulars to the Provident Fund Inspector, Sivakasi, stating that 14 women were employed in the factory, that 6 men were employed in the bazar shop and that 9 persons were under their employment continuously for one year. On the basis of this information, the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner issued a notice to the petitioner dated 17th December, 1968 stating that the factory came within the purview of the Act and the scheme framed there...
Chokkan Palani Vilas by Its Partner Periasamy Vs. the Regional Provide ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-13-1971
Reported in: (1972)2MLJ268
ORDERK.S. Palaniswami, J.1. The petitioner, a partnership-firm, prays for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to enforce the provisions of the Employees Provident Funds Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) under the following circumstances. The petitioner-firm, said to have been started 25 years ago, is manufacturing snuff. Its factory is situated at Adidravidan Street at Kamuthi, Ranianathapuram District. The firm has also a shop at Nadar Bazar, Kamuthi. On 21st November, 1968, the petitioner-firm furnished some particulars to the Provident Fund Inspector, Sivakasi, stating that 14 women were employed in the factory, that 6 men were employed in the bazar shop and that 9 persons were under their employment continuously for one year. On the basis of this information, the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner issued a notice to the petitioner dated 17th December, 1968 stating that the factory came within the purview of the Act and the scheme framed ther...
A.R.A. Karuppiah Nadar and ors. Vs. the Commissioner of Civil Supplies ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Mad204
ORDER1. In this batch of writ petitions, the common question involved is whether the respondents are in order in invoking the provisions of the Madras Revenue Recovery Act and whether it is warranted. In all these cases, a writ of Mandamus is sought by the petitioners. The writ petitions however are not very clear as to the exact relief sought. The learned counsel for the petitioners makes it clear that the relief which the writ petitioners seek in this batch is to interdict the respondents from invoking the provisions of the Madras Revenue Recovery Act for recovering certain alleged arrears due from the petitioners pursuant to certain contracts entered into between the petitioners and the Commissioner of Civil Supplies. The agreement which is entered into between the parties on the one hand and the State on the other, may be looked into at this stage for a proper reckoning of their rights and obligations. The petitioners are all characterised as procuring agents and they have entered ...
S.N. Vr. Ct. Chinnan Chettiar and ors. Vs. Official Receiver
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-1971
Reported in: [1971]41CompCas914(Mad); (1971)IIMLJ490
Ramanujam, J. 1. These are two appeals filed against the orders of the District Court, Madurai, in C.M.P. No. 350 of 1958 in O.P. No. 97 of 1955, High Court, Madras, ordering a public examination of the appellants herein under ~ 196 of the Indian Companies Act, As both the appeals arise out of the same order, they are dealt with together. A public limited company by name, Madurai Srinivasa Mills Ltd., was floated in the year 1946 as a textile mill and the certificate of incorporation was issued on January 17, 1946. Originally the firm of M/s. Srinivasan and Co. was acting as the managing agents of the said company. There were three partners in that firm, Narayanan Chettiar, Chinnan Chettiar and Mani lyer. The said partners of the firm were also the directors of the company, and the managing agency agreement between the company and the said firm of Srinivasan and Company provided that the firm should be the managing agents of the mills for a period of 20 years. For locating the mills an...
G. Kesarichand and anr. Vs. T.A. Sankunni Maistry
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-1971
Reported in: (1972)1MLJ358
M.M. Ismail, J.1. The plaintiffs in O.S. No. 1 of 1963 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Nilgiris at Ootacamund, who lost before the trial Court as well as before the 1st appellate Court are the appellants before this Court. They are purchasers of the suit property from the previous owner, by name, the Nilgiri Gowder Corporation Limited, Coonoor, under Exhibit A-1, dated 30th June, 1961. Admittedly, prior to the sale in favour of the appellants, the Nilgiri Gowder Corporation Limited, leased out the suit site in favour of the respondent herein, in connection with the two lease deeds which were not produced before the Court and which were executed between the parties, the respondent had paid a sum of Rs. 1,000 by way of advance whose character I shall have to refer to in detail in the course of the judgment. After the purchase of the suit property under Exhibit A-1 and after determining the tenancy, the present suit was instituted by the appellants herein for recovery o...
K. Subramania Iyer and anr. Vs. Olaganathan Pillai and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-08-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Mad250; (1971)IIMLJ233
1. This second appeal arises out of proceedings in execution of a decree in O. S. No. 12 of 1959 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Thanjavur, in so far as it related to costs of Rs. 5,080.50. E.P. No. 42 of 1965 was filed by the two decree-holders, namely, K. Subramania Iyer and K. Gopalswamy Iyer. But K. Gopalswamy Iyer died, leaving as his legal representative G. Krishnamani. Because the legal representative had to be impleaded and the encumbrance certificates were not yet ready, on behalf of K. Subramania Iyer, the other decree-holder it was represented that the execution petition might be closed. order was accordingly passed by the executing court on 9-3-1965:'E.P. dismissed. Attachment to continue for three months.'2. E.P. No. 480 of 1965 was filed on 14-6-1965 on the date of the reopening of the Court after the summer recess, but without any prayer for fresh attachment. It was filed by K. Subramania Iyer and G. Krishnamani, the legal representative of the other decree...
K. Radhakrishna Chetty Vs. N. Rajagopal Pillai and Co.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-08-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Mad107; (1971)2MLJ382
ORDER1. Petitioner, Radhakrishna Chetti, seeks to revise the order in E. A. No. 149 of 1969 in E. P. No. 532 of 1963 in H. R. C. No. 4319 of 1962 on the file of the Fifth Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Madras, allowing the application of the respondent, Rajagopala Pillai, under Section 144, Civil P. C. for redelivery of the property leased to him. It is necessary to state only a few facts for the disposal of this civil revision petition.2. The petitioner filed H. R. C. No. 4319 of 1962 on the file of the House Rent Controller, Madras for eviction of the respondent, but it was dismissed on 12-10-1964, and thereupon he preferred H. R. A. 41 of 1965 on the file of the Court of Small Causes, Madras, and obtained an order for eviction on 16-2-1966. He claims to have put one Siddique in possession of the property after obtaining possession through court. Siddique filed O. S. 1504 of 1964 on the file of the City Civil Court. Madras against the petitioner and the respondent herein for inju...
Sha Manmall Misrimall Vs. K. Radhakrishnan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-07-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Mad108; (1971)IIMLJ487
V. Ramaswami, J. 1. The plaintiff is the appellant. The suit was filed by the plaintiff firm for recovery of a sum of Rs. 8562-12-3 with interest and costs. The case of the plaintiff was that from 18-5-1953 till 17-9-1956 the defendant had dealing with the plaintiff, which consisted of the plaintiff advancing moneys in respect of goods imported by the defendant under his licence. Such goods, when imported, would be sold by the defendant to the plaintiff for an agreed rate and the invoice of each was credited to the account of the defendant. The plaintiff further contended that the amounts advanced by the plaintiff to the defendant were agreed to be repaid with interest at 9 per cent, per annum. In respect of such amount, the plaintiff claimed that there was due and payable by the defendant a sum of Rs. 7146-1-9 for balance of principal and Rs. 1,416-10-6 for interest, aggregating to Rs. 8562-12-3. The plaintiff pleaded that the suit was not barred by limitation by reason of adjustments...
Mohammed Abdul Kadas and ors. Vs. the District Collector of Kanyakumar ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-07-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Mad56; (1971)2MLJ267
1. Appellants and respondents 2 and 3 are the legal representatives of the deceased Osan Pillai who filed the suit for a declaration of his title to the properties involved in the L. C. Cases 3, 4 and 5 of 1957 of Ezhudesom village, for possession of the said properties with mesne profits at Rupees 1,500/- per year from the date of the suit till recovery of the properties, for recovery of Rs. 1,780.63/- paid as fine and prohibitory assessment and in the alternative for recovery of Rs. 1,5000/- as value of improvements with interest at 6 per cent, per annum from the date of the suit till the date of recovery.2. Appellants 1 and 2 and one Mohammed Pathummal were brought on record as the legal representatives of the deceased Osan Pillai. But subsequently, Mohammed Pathummal died and there were rival claims by Appellants 3 and 4 on the one hand who claim as heirs and respondents 2 and 3 on the other who claim under a will. There appears to have been an agreement between the parties. But as...
S.K. Natesam Pillai Vs. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-07-1971
Reported in: [1971]28STC517(Mad)
ORDERRamaprasada Rao, J. 1. The petitioner is a dealer in plantain in Gandhi Market, Tiruchirapalli. For the year 1959-60, on a turnover of Rs. 2,44,254.25, he was assessed to sales tax in the sum of Rs. 2,442.54 by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Trichy Town II, by his order dated 30th October, 1960. The petitioner took up the matter in appeal before the appellate authority and to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, who in turn, confirmed the assessment. The consistent stand of the petitioner before the revenue as well as the Appellate Tribunal was that in accordance with G.O. Ms. No. 1285, Revenue, dated 27th April, 1959, he was not liable to sales tax for the year 1959-60, as, under the G.O., the plantain dealers, who are not income-tax assessees or who have not submitted or called upon to submit returns under the Indian Income-tax Act, are not liable to pay sales tax. The appellate authority found that there was such a G.O., but felt helpless to grant any relief and directed the p...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »