Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1974Mad131
ORDER1. The petitioner is aggrieved, by a notification published in the Fort St. George Gazette under Section 3(3) of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act 1959. The notification is dated 3-11-1970. The circumstances under which the notification was issued are as follows: On receipt of complaints that a charitable endowment known as the Periyanagiammal Annadana Chatram, Karungalakudi village, Melur Taluk, Madurai District, was being mismanaged, an enquiry was undertaken by the Commissioner at the behest of the Government who issued specific orders to the Commissioner to enquiry or cause an enquiry to be made into the affairs of the said charitable endowment. The Government has such a power to probe into the management of a charitable endowment if it has reason to believe that the public charitable endowment is being mismanaged. On a requisition so made and a directive so issued by the Government under Section 3(1) it is common ground that, the Assistant Commissio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1973Mad409; (1973)1MLJ341
K. Veeraswami, C.J. 1. Alagiriswami, J. has refused to issue a rule nisi against an order of the Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation by which he had set aside the termination by the appellant bank of the first respondent's services. The termination order which followed a domestic enquiry was dated 26-2-1968. The charge against the first respondent framed as early as 18-10-1965, was that he had, on 29-4-1965 and 20-9-1965 issued two circulars Nos. 2 of 1965 and 3 of 1965 respectively, in the name of the appellant bank employees union subscribing his name thereto as its secretary, and caused them to be distributed freely among the members of the staff of the appellant bank at its central office and its branches that in the two circulars he had made baseless and scurrilous allegations against the management with a view to create prejudice in the minds of the staff in order to bring about disharmony between the management and the staff, and also by these allegations to bring...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [1973]43CompCas244(Mad)
Ramamurti, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the official liquidator representing Manasuba & Co. (P.) Ltd. in liquidation, against the order of the learned judge, Veeraswami J. (as he then was), upholding the claim ofN. Chandranarayanan (the applicant before the learned judge) to preferential payment of a sum of Rs. 30,000 in the hands of the official liquidator.2. The brief facts of the case are:Manasuba and Co. (P.) Ltd. which was carrying on business as engineers, contractors, etc. (hereinafter referred to as 'the company') applied, on December 5, 1960, to the Mandya National Paper Mills Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the mills') through South India Corporation Agencies (P.) Ltd. for Manasuba Company being appointed one of the stockists for distribution of paper in the city of Madras for a total quantity of 250 tons per annum. The mills appeared to have accepted this proposal on February 13, 1961, subject to certain important terms and conditions which have been embodied in writin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1973)1MLJ313
ORDERT. Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. The Petitioner is aggrieved by a notification published in the Fort St. George Gazette under Section 3(3) of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. The notification is dated 3rd November, 1970. The circumstances under which the notification was issued are as follows : On receipt of complaints that a charitable endowments known as the Periyanayagiammal Annadana Chatram, Karungalkudi Village, Melur Taluk, Madurai District, was being mismanaged, an 1 enquiry was undertaken by the Commissioner at the behest of the Government who issued specific orders to the Commissioner to enquire or cause an enquiry to be made into the affairs of the said charitable endowment. The 'Government has such a power to probe into the management of a charitable endowment if it has reason to believe that the public charitable endowment is being mismanaged. On a requisition so made and a directive so issued by the Government under Section 3 (1) it is commo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1973Mad309; (1973)1MLJ264
1. The plaintiffs who failed in the courts below are the appellants in the second appeal. One Thangavelu, maternal grandfather of the plaintiffs executed a settlement deed Ex. A-1 dated 27-10-1944 under which he gave a life estate in the suit property to his daughter Kanchanamala and the vested remainder to his grandsons. The mother executed a surrender deed Ex. A-2, dated 1-8-1956 in favor of her children with the result that the remaindermen became entitled to the present possession of the property from the date of Ex. A-2. They have become the absolute owners of the property. The defendant obtained a decree against Kanchanamala in O. S. 1701 of 1956 for a sum of Rs. 1300 and he sought to attach the property in the hands of the minors on the ground that the surrender made by the mother judgment-debtor was not a bona fide transaction and that it was a fraudulent transfer intended to defeat and delay the claim of the creditor. The courts below upheld the claim of the decree-holder in t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [1974]96ITR165(Mad)
Ramaswami, J.1. These are two revision petitions filed under Section 54(1) of the Madras Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955 (hereinafter called ' the Act'), in respect of two assessment years 1963-64 and 1964-65.The assessee-petitioner is a public limited company owning both coffee and tea estates. Certain items of expenditure of the company were disallowed in determining the total agricultural income by the Additional Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Coonoor. This disallowance was confirmed by the Assistant Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Ootacamund and the Tribunal. The items of expenditure in question for the assessment years 1963-64 and 1964-65 are as follows :1. Subscriptions paid to Ross Institute of Tropical Hygiene and the Sports Club of UPASI. 2. Secretarial and general charges of the company. 3. Legal expenses incurred in connection with the various matters relating to the day-to-day carrying on of the business of the company. 2. For the assessment year 1963-64 under ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [1973]91ITR427(Mad)
Ramaswami, J. 1. The following two questions have been referred fordecision: '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the sum of Rs. 1,18,875 was a trading loss deductible under Section 10(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, in order to arrive at the profits of the assessee's business for the assessment year 1957-58 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee's claim was not entertainable under Section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922?' 2. The assessee is a registered firm carrying on business in export of manganese and iron ore. It entered into four contracts with M/s. M. Golodetz & Co., New York, undertaking to supply certain quantities of manganese ore of a specified quality within a specified period. After supplying certain quantity of ore as per the agreement, due to the nonavailability of the specified quality...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [1973]91ITR638(Mad)
Ramanujam, J. 1. As the point arising in all these three tax cases is thesame, they can be dealt with together, though they had been filed by different assessees. The question that is raised in these cases is as to whetherthe deduction under Section 5(k) of the Madras Agricultural Income-taxAct towards the interest paid by the assessee in the previous year on theamounts borrowed and actually spent on the land from which agriculturalincome is derived should be limited to an amount equivalent to 25% of thenet agricultural income or the gross agricultural income. 2. According to the assessees, the expression 'agricultural income', occurring in the second proviso to Section 5(k), should be understood in the sense in which it has been defined in Section 2(a) and if so read the assessee will be entitled to the deduction of interest paid in the previous year on the amounts borrowed and actually spent on the land up to the limit of 25% of the gross agricultural income received during the year....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [1973]32STC139(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The petitioner-firm is a dealer in papers and boards. For the assessment year 1963-64 it has been assessed under the Central Sales Tax Act. In the course of the assessment, the assessee claimed that a turnover of Rs. 3,98,029.63 represented the second or subsequent inter-State sales by transfer of documents of title to the goods during the movement of the same from this State to the State of Andhra Pradesh and that, therefore, the entire turnover is exempt from tax Under Section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. It also contended that in any event the said turnover is liable to be taxed at the concessional rate of 2 per cent and not at the general rate of 10 per cent as it has produced the D form certificate from the buying department. This claim was rejected both by the assessing as well as appellate authority. The Tribunal has, however, upheld the claim of the assessee to the con-cessional rate of two per cent; but it rejected the claim for exemption of the ent...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1974Mad133
ORDER1. The tenant is the petitioner herein. The landlord applied for eviction on the ground that the premises was required for the purpose of demolition and reconstruction. The Trial Court held that the petitioner before the Rent Controller is not competent to maintain the petition as he is one of the joint co-owners and dismissed, it. On appeal, the appellate court held that the petition is maintainable and ordered a remand to the Rent Controller for disposal, on merits. This petition is filed by the tenant against the said order of remand.2. The father of the respondent herein had settled the house property on the respondent herein and his three brothers, by means of a settlement deed dated 14-7-1966. The respondent was named as the manager. The father also directed the tenant to pay the rent to the eldest of the four sons, namely, the respondent herein, who was in management of the property. In the petition it was also alleged that the building is old and in a dilapidate condition ...
Tag this Judgment!