Chennai Court January 1972 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.
Tirupurasundari Ammal and ors. Vs. Srinivasam Pillai and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-18-1972
Reported in: AIR1972Mad264
Ismail, J.1. The plaintiffs in O.S. No. 18 of 1966 on the file of the court of the Subordinate Judge of Thanjavur are the appellants herein. There was an undivided Hindu family consisting of one Kalyanasundaram Pillai, his son Sabapathy Pillai and his son Srinivasam Pillai, the first defendant in the suit. There was a partition between them as evidenced by Ex. A-1 dated 21-4-1955. Under that partition, the joint family properties were divided into four schedules, A, B, C and D; A schedule was allotted to the share of Kalyanasundaram Pillai, B schedule was allotted to the share of Sabapathi Pillai, C schedule was allotted to the share of the first defendant Srinivasam Pillai, and D schedule was allotted to Sabapathi Pillai and Srinivasam Pillai jointly. Sabapathi Pillai died on 5th December, 1962. The plaintiffs-appellants are his widow and three daughters, the first defendant is his son and the 18th defendant is his mother. The appellants herein instituted the suit claiming that to the...
T.N.K. Govindarajulu Chetty Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-18-1972
Reported in: [1973]87ITR22(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The assessee-firm purchased a property known as ' Lutterals Gardens ' on April 2, 1943. This property was requisitioned by the Government of India by a notification issued by the Collector of Madras, on January 30, 1944, under the Defence of India Act, and the same was acquired ultimately by the Government of Madras under Section 5 of the Requisitioned Land (Continuance of Powers) Act, 1947, by a notification dated May 24, 1949, issued by the Collector of Madras. The Collector fixed the compensation payable to the assessee at Rs. 2,40,000. Dissatisfied with the amount of compensation fixed by the Collector for the property acquired, the assessee sought a reference to the arbitrator, the Chief Judge of the Court of Small Causes, Madras, who fixed the compensation payable to the assessee at Rs. 3,67,666 with interest at 6% per annum from May 24, 1949. Against the said award of the arbitrator the assessee filed an appeal to this court in A.A.O. No. 644/195! contending that...
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Smt. Y. Annapurnamba
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-18-1972
Reported in: [1972]84ITR756(Mad)
Ramaswami, J.1. This is a reference under Section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, and the question referred for our decision is :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the value of the insurance policies of Rs. 92,520 taken on the life of the deceased and nominated in favour of the wife of the deceased could not be included in the estate of the deceased ?'2. The deceased, Ramanatha Babu, had taken out insurance policies on his life of the total value of Rs. 37,270. In addition to these policies, he had also taken out an insurance policy of the value of 55,250 for the purpose of payment of estate duty. As seen from the facts found and it is also admitted that the premiums for these policies were paid out of the coparcenary funds and that entries have been made in the Hindu undivided family accounts in regard to the payments. The deceased was a member of a coparcenary, the other coparcener being his son. The wido...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. U. G. Krishnaswami Naidu (Decd.) by L. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-18-1972
Reported in: [1972]86ITR239(Mad)
RAMANUJAM J. - As these two tax cases are interconnected, they are dealt with together.The assessee in T.C. No. 17 of 1965 is one U. G. Krishnaswami Naidu who is the aunts son of one Ramaswami Naidu, the assessee in T.C. No. 66 of 1965. The substantial question that has been raised in both the cases is as to whether the business carried on by U. G. Krishnaswami Naidu was his own or whether it was the business of Ramaswami Naidu. Ramswami Naidu was a partner in a firm called 'G. Krishna and Company' which was acting as the managing agent of a textile mill called 'Kadiri Mills Ltd.', hereinafter referred to as the mills, which went into production in or about February, 1950. Ramaswami Naidu had an eight annas share in the managing agency firm, 'G. Krishna and Company'. The mills applied to the Textile Commissioner for permission to start a ginning factory. In anticipation of getting the requisite permission, the mills had advanced Rs. 1.54 lakhs to cotton growers for the supply of cotton...
Smt. R.V. Kamalam Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-17-1972
Reported in: [1973]87ITR265(Mad)
Ramanujam, J. 1. This reference has been made by the Tribunal under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, and the question referred to us for decision is whether in the circumstances the wealth-tax levied on the legal representative of the deceased who is the assessee, is in accordance with law. 2. The facts and circumstances which led to this reference can be briefly stated: The assessee's brother submitted a wealth-tax return for the assessment year ending March 31, 1959, wherein he showed that he was possessed of jewels worth Rs. 40,000. The Wealth-tax Officer, however, did not accept that return, but proceeded to value the jewels in his hands at Rs. 1,00,000 based on the valuations of the jewels made in the previous years. His statement that he has disposed of a substantial portion of the jewels during that assessment year and that what remained with him was only jewels worth at Rs. 40,000 was specifically disbelieved. The valuation of the jewels at Rs. 1,00,000 during that assessme...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. A.M. Kaithan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-17-1972
Reported in: [1972]85ITR14(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The assessee in this case is a partner in a registered firm called General Swadesi Stores, and for the assessment years 1958-59 1959-60 and 1960-61, he derived share income of Rs. 18,313, Rs. 24,991 and Rs. 26,677, respectively. From the share income received by him, the assessee claimed as deduction under Section 10(2)(xv) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, the salary which he has paid to one Mr. Dalmia, said to have been appointed by him for looking after his interests in the partnership. The Income-tax Officer disallowed his claim for deduction on the ground that the share income of the assessee having been arrived at after giving deductions under Section 23(5)(a) it is not possible to make further deductions under Section 10(2)(xv) in the individual assessment of the assessee as against his share income from the firm. But the Income-tax Officer, however, gave a definite finding that the said Mr. Dalmia has been looking after the interests of the assessee in the firm, and ...
In Re: Kothandam
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-13-1972
Reported in: (1972)1MLJ408
S. Maharajan, J.1. This is an appeal against the Judgment of the learned Chief Presidency Magistrate, Madras, convicting the appellant of the offences under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, and Sections 116 and 121 of the Motor Vehicles Act, and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 9 months under the first count and two months on the third count, the sentences to run concurrently, without awarding any separate sentence in respect of the second count. The appellant is the driver of the lorry MDY 4244. At about 5-55 P.M., on nth August, 1969,he was driving the lorry in a northerly direction along Mount Road. P.W. 4 the Traffic Constable who was standing at the pedestrian crossing at Thousand Lights, gave the stop signal for the vehicles coming from the north as well as from the south. It appears that there used to be two constables on duty at that crossing. But one of them had not turned up that day with the result that P.W. 4 had to regulate the entire traffic comi...
N. Pappu Reddiar and ors. Vs. the Regional Transport Authority,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-12-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Mad271; (1973)1MLJ52
ORDER1. In W. P. Nos. 2025 and 2916 of 1971 writs of prohibition are sought and in W. P. No. 2534 of 1971, now converted into a Civil Revision Petition, a writ of certiorari is asked. It is agreed that the facts in W. P. No. 2534 of 1971 as it was originally filed may be looked into for purposes of appreciating the contentions of parties. The petitioner is a transport operator. The Regional Transport Authority Salem, invited applications under Section 57(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act for the grant of stage carriage permit on the Town Service route Namakkal to Ponneri and fixed the last date for receipt of applications in due form as December 11, 1970. The petitioner and four others, including the 1st respondent, were applicants for the grant. It is common ground that the petitioner sent the application in due form as also the necessary proof of payment of the prescribed fee which should accompany such applications. Thereafter the applications were notified under Section 57(3) of the Act...
Bhoona Bi and anr. Vs. Gujar Bi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-12-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Mad154
1. This appeal, which has been preferred by the defendant, is directed against the judgment of the learned Second Additional Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirapalli, in O. S. 160 of 1962.2. The suit properties originally belonged to one Abdul Sathar, who died on 17-12-1960, leaving him surviving his mother Gujar Bi alias Hamida Bi (the plaintiff-respondent) and his wife Bhoona Bi (the defendant-appellant). Under Ex. B-1 dated 13-11-1953, that is to say, about 7 years before his death, Abdul Sathar gifted items 1 and 2 of the plaint A schedule properties in favor of his wife. Under Ex. B-2, dated 21-10-1959, that is to say, about one year and two months before his death, Abdul Sathar gifted items 3 and 4 of the plaint A schedule and other properties in favor of his wife. The donee accepted the gifts, took delivery of possession of the gifted properties, collected rents therefrom and paid tax therefor. After the death of Abdul Sathar, however, his mother instituted a suit in forma pauper's for...
Bhoona Bi (Died) by L.R. Vs. Gujar Bi Alias Hamida Bi, Wife of Abdul S ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-12-1972
Reported in: (1972)2MLJ624
Maharajan, J.1. This appeal, which has been preferred by the defendant is directed against the Judgment of the learned Second Additional Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirapalli, in O.S. No. 160 of 1962.2. The suit properties originally belonged to one Abdul Sathar, who died on 17th December, i960, leaving him surviving his mother Gujar Bi alias Hamida Bi (the plaintiff - respondent) and his wife Bhoona Bi (the defendant-appellant). Under Exhibit B-1 dated 13th November, 1953, that is to say, about seven years before his death, Abdul Sathar gifted items 1 and 2 of the plaint 'A' Schedule properties in favour of his wife. Under Exhibit B-2 dated 21st October, 1959, that is to say, about one year and two months before his death, Abdul Sathar gifted items 3 and 4 of the plaint 'A' Schedule and other properties in favour of his wife. The donee accepted the gifts, took delivery of possession of the gifted properties, collected rents therefrom and paid tax therefor. After the death of Abdul Sathar,...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »