Chennai Court March 1973 Judgments
Karuppana Gounder and anr. Vs. Chinna Nachammal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-26-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Mad329
1. This second appeal with the Cross Objections is before us on a reference made by Ismail, J. The question which was raised before the learned Judge resulting in the matter being placed before a Bench is whether an unmarried daughter of a Hindu who gets a share in his estate would still be entitled for a provision for her marriage expenses in a suit for partition. One Kandasami Gounder who died on 26-9-1964 was the karta of a Hindu joint family. His only son is Karuppana Gounder, the first defendant in the suit for partition instituted by one of the daughters of the said Kandasami Gounder in the court of the District Munsif, Palani. Kandasami Gounder left his widow, Sellammal, (who has been impleaded as the 6th defendant in the suit) and five daughters apart from his Karuppanna. The eldest of the five daughters by name Chinna Nachammal is the plaintiff and the other four daughters have been impleaded as defendants 2 to 5 respectively. All the daughters except the last one by name Subb...
Tag this Judgment!P.A. Arumugham Vs. National Palayakot Company
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-1973
Reported in: (1973)2MLJ380
P.R. Gokulakrishnan, J.1. The landlord is the petitioner. He filed the eviction petition against the respondent-tenant under Section 10(3)(c) of the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, XVIII of 1960. In that petition, the landlord has averred that his family has grown, that one of his daughters has since been married and another daughter and son also have to be married shortly, that on account of the growth of the family as well as increase in the number of visitors and guests owing to the alliance etc., he finds that the present accommodation in the first floor is very inadequate to meet his needs, that he is put to such inconvenience and hardship for want of sufficient accommodation that the rear portion of the first floor in the occupation of another tenant, being small and inconvenient, is not sufficient to meet the needs of the petitioner and that the landlord requires the ground-floor portion in the occupation of the respondent-tenant for bona fide additional accommoda...
Tag this Judgment!Suseela Ammal, Legal Representative of A. Sivasankara Mudaliar Vs. the ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-1973
Reported in: (1973)2MLJ509
ORDERM.M. Ismail, J.1. This is a petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil procedure to revise the order of the Chief Judge of the Court of Small Causes, Madras, functioning as the Appellate Authority, dated 12th November, 1971, made in T.P.A. No. 2 of 1970. Admittedly the petitioner herein is the owner of a plot of land covered by the Mylapore-Teynampet Area Town Planning Scheme. The scheme was published under Section 12 of the Madras Town Planning Act, 1920 (Madras Act VII of 1920) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on 19th November, 1958. The respondent Municipal Corporation preferred a claim for betterment contribution, before the Arbitrator under Section 27 (1) of the Act. The petitioner contend d that, though the land in question had increased in value, that increase was not due to the making of the Town Planning Scheme and that consequently the respondent Corporation was not entitled to levy betterment contribution in respect of the land of the petitioner. The Arbitrator...
Tag this Judgment!The Union of India and ors. Vs. Ramchand Kishinchand and Co., Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Mad335
1. The Union of India and the other officials of the Railways who were defendants 1 to 5 in the suit are the appellants. The suit was filed by the respondent plaintiff company for the recovery of a sum of Rs.4780-98 in respect of certain goods despatched by it from Madras to the 6th defendant at Sahranpur in Uttar Pradesh. The goods were consigned on 26-6-1962 from Madras for delivery to self at Sahranpur. The plaintiff forwarded the way bill through the Central Bank of India for the purpose of collection. When the plaintiff came to know from the Station Master at Sahranpur that the goods were delivered to a wrong person on a forged railway receipt, the plaintiff had filed this suit.2. A number of pleas were raised in defence but only two of them were argued in this second appeal. The first ground argued by the learned counsel for the appellants was that a fraud was committed by the consignee and the goods were taken delivery of on 24-7-1962, by producing a forged railway receipt and t...
Tag this Judgment!Arumugha Kone Vs. the Palayamcottai Municipal Council Represented by I ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-1973
Reported in: (1974)1MLJ258
M. M. Ismail, J.1. Writ Appeal No. 218 of 1972 has been filed against the Judgment of Ramaprasada Rao, J., dated 20th July, 1972 dismissing W.P. No. 777 of 1972, filed by the appellant herein. The Palayamcottai Municipality owns a public market known as the Municipal Mahatma Gandhi Market and the appellant herein happened to be a licensee of stall Nos. 1 and 2 in Block No. 9 of the said market. He filed the writ petition (W.P.No. 777 of 1972) praying for the issue of a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction forbearing the respondents therein 'from enforcing or collecting the increased fees for the use of the stalls, shops, pans and stands situated in the Mahatma Gandhi Market at Palayamcottai, pursuant to the resolution passed by the first respondent, namely, the Municipal Council, No. 1518 (1 to 7) dated 14th February, 1972. The said market has been established several years ago and is maintained out of the Municipal funds. The market consists of a large nu...
Tag this Judgment!Kora Miah Saheb Vs. Velayudha Konar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-21-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Mad248
1. The third defendant is the appellant. The suit is for recovery of Rs. 6,348-45 and subsequent interest on foot of a mortgage dated 5-5-1946 executed by defendants 1 and 2 in favour of one Pavalesa Konar and received consideration as recited in the document. The said mortgage was made redeemable at any time after 5-5-1948. The mortgagors agreed that in default of repayment of the mortgage debt before that date they would be liable to pay compound interest at the rate of 75 paise per Rs. 100 per month, Rs. 6,348-45 is now due on the aforesaid mortgage, which is claimed in the suit.2-10. * * *11. Before dealing with the points raised I shall now state the real controversy between the parties. Defendants 1 and 2 are the original owners of the suit property. On 5-5-1949(Ex. A-2) he executed an oath in favour of Palavesa Konar. On 1-5-1949(Ex. A-3) the second defendant executed a sale in favour of the first defendant reserving a right of residence in favour of himself and his wife. On 15-...
Tag this Judgment!Mettur Beardsell Limited and Ors. Vs. the Employees' State Insurance' ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-21-1973
Reported in: (1973)2MLJ195
ORDERT. Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. These writ petitions are connected; for the purpose of narrating the facts, it is enough to notice the facts in Writ Petition No. 3238 of 1971. The petitioner is a private limited company having its factory at Madhavaram within the limits of the City of Madras. But it has an independent administrative office at No. 52/53, Jehangir Street, Madras-1. The petitioner's case is that there are about 67 workers exclusively working in the factory of the petitioner-company and there are a few others numbering about 30 as on date working in the administrative office of the company in the address as above. The respondent as the statutory functionary under the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 was of the view that by reason of the amendment of the word 'employee' in Section 2 (9) of the Act, the employees of the petitioner, even, though working in the administrative office as above, would squarely come within the meaning of the word 'employee' as defined in Section...
Tag this Judgment!Indian Express (Madurai) Private Ltd. and ors. Vs. Chief Presidency Ma ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-20-1973
Reported in: [1974]44CompCas106(Mad); (1973)2MLJ469
1. Writ Appeals Nos. 554/71, 69/72 and 70/72 are directed against the judgment of Ramaprasada Rao J, dismissing the Writ Petitions Nos. 1916/71, 1917/71 and 1918/71 preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of writs of certiorari calling for the records in RC. No. 2/71-SIV relating to the warrants issued by the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Egmore, Madras, dated June 7, 1971, and to quash the said warrants, while writ Appeals Nos. 555/71, 71/72 and 72/72 are directed against the judgment of Ramaprasada Rao J. dismissing Writ Petitions Nos. 2394, 2395 and 2396 of 1971 preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of writs of mandamus directing the first respondent therein, the Company Law Board, to withdraw the complaint lodged by it with the Central Bureau of Investigation and to refrain from prosecuting their investigation or taking any further action in the matter of the alleged violation of Sections 420, 477 and 120B of the Indian...
Tag this Judgment!R. Chinnaswami Chettiar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-20-1973
Reported in: [1974]96ITR353(Mad)
Ramaswamy, J.1. The assessee carries on business in the purchase and sale of yarn in Tirupur. During the previous year ending October 7, 1962, relevant for the assessment year 1963-64, the assessee entered into a number of contracts. In regard to three contracts of sale dated 13th, 16th and 19th July, 1962, and one contract of purchase dated 12th September, 1962, the assessee did not give or take actual delivery of yarn but the contracts were cancelled. The assessee paid a sum of Rs. 7,750 in respect of all these contracts and claimed these amounts at business losses incurred by him. The Income-tax Officer considered that this is a loss on speculation business and, therefore, could not be set off against the income from business but could be carried forward to be set off against speculation profits. On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was of the view that the above contracts were entered into in the usual course of yarn trade, that the cancellation of contracts and payment ...
Tag this Judgment!A. Muthukumara Pillai Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-20-1973
Reported in: [1974]96ITR557(Mad)
Ramaswami, J.1. The assessee was a dealer in yarn. In the return of income of its business for the previous year ending April 12, 1962, corresponding to the assessment year 1962-63, it claimed a deduction of Rs. 16,000 as payments made in settlement of certain contracts entered into by it. The assessee had entered into seven contracts with Kothari Textiles Ltd. for the purchase of 180 bales of 40's yarn at Rs. 28.75 per bundle. A few days later and in one or two cases on the same day, after the contracts had been entered into, the assessee also entered into contracts for the purchase of 120 bales of 80's at Rs. 76.75. During the previous year the Indian Cotton Mills Federation, Bombay, had fixed a sort of an unofficial ceiling of price of cotton yarn up to 40's. The purchase price of Rs. 28.75 fixed under the contract above referred to was in accordance with the schedule of rates fixed by the Indian Cotton Federation. The nature of the transaction could be better desciibed with referen...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »