Chennai Court July 1973 Judgments
Vadivel Mudaliar and anr. Vs. Pachianna Gounder
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-18-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Mad87
ORDER1. The petitioners herein are defendants. The respondent filed O.S. No 474 of 1972 before the District Munsif Court, Gobichettipalayam, for a permanent injunction restraining the petitioners herein from interfering with his right to leasehold possession and enjoyment of the suit properties on the ground that he is entitled to be protected under the Cultivating Tenants Protection Act. The respondent filed I.A. No. 812 of 1972 for an order of Interim Injunction till the disposal of the suit under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2, C.P. Code. The petitioners herein filed I.A. No. 1110 of 1972 for vacating the ad interim injunction granted. The District Munsif took up both I.A. Nos. 812 and 1110 of 1972, and disposed of them by his order dated 3-7-1972. He held that there is a prima facie case made out by the respondent herein as lessee and as such he is entitled to protection by way of an interim injunction under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. Accordingly, the order of ad interim injunc...
Tag this Judgment!K. Ramalingam and ors. Vs. K.N. Krishna Reddi and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-18-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Mad325
ORDER1. Defendants 2 to 4 are the appellants in the second appeal. The first respondent therein filed O. S. 370 of 1968, on the file of the Court of the District Munsif, Sholinghur, for declaration of his title to the suit property and for possession alleging that he purchased the property from the appellants' father on 5-9-1967. The appellants' father is dead. The appellants resisted the suit contending inter alia that the sale deed has not been executed by them and that the said deed is vitiated by fraud and misrepresentation. The trial court dismissed the suit. On appeal, the lower appellate court decreed the suit. Aggrieved by the said defendants 2 to 4 have come up in second appeal.2. Along with second appeal, the appellants filed C. M. P. 3428 of 1973 for grant of interim stay alleging that they are in possession of the suit property and that in order to protect their possession stay of the operation of the decree of the lower appellate court has to be granted. This court granted...
Tag this Judgment!State of Madras Vs. A.L.S. Productions
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-18-1973
Reported in: [1974]33STC335(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The State is the petitioner in both these cases. The respondents are producers and suppliers of advertisement films having their place of business at No. 14, Ratna Chetty Street, Madras-14. Their place of business was inspected by the Special Deputy Commercial Tax Officer (Intelligence) III, on 17th October, 1964, and one file containing correspondence with one Messrs. Lintas Limited, Bombay, an advertising firm, regarding the production and supply of advertisement films for the latter relating to Lux Toilet Soaps had been recovered. A verification of the said file with the books of account of the respondents, hereinafter referred to as the 'assessees', revealed that they had entered into a contract with Messrs. Lintas Limited, hereinafter called the 'Advertiser', for production of four advertisement films in colour, that the said four ultra short films in colour including their dubbed versions in Telugu, Malayalam and Canarese were produced and processed, that the prin...
Tag this Judgment!Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Vs. North Arcot District Co-op ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-18-1973
Reported in: [1974]34STC543(Mad)
Ramanujam, J. 1. The respondent in both these cases is the North Arcot District Co-operative Sugar Mills Limited, hereinafter called the mills. The first case relates to the assessment year 1965-66, while the second relates to the assessment year 1968-69. For the assessment year 1965-66, the mills were assessed under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959, on their sales of fertilisers to cane-growers, amounting to Rs. 5,13,311.36 and for the assessment year 1968-69 they were assessed not only on their sales of fertilisers amounting to Rs. 12,94,284.46 but also on their sales of press-mud for Rs. 3,135.77. The mills disputed their liability to pay sales tax on their sales of fertilisers and press-mud. The assessing authority had overruled the objection of the mills. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner on appeal upheld the levy of tax on the sales of fertilisers during the assessment year 1965-66. But for the assessment year 1968-69 he has set aside the assessment on the sale value of ...
Tag this Judgment!Vadivel Mudaliar and anr. Vs. Pachianna Goundar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-18-1973
Reported in: (1973)2MLJ452
ORDERP.R. Gokulakrishnan, J.1. The petitioners herein are defendants. The respondent filed O.S. No. 474 of 1972 before the District Munsif's Court, Gobichettipalayam, for a permanent injunction restraining the petitioners herein from interfering with his right to leasehold possession and enjoyment of the suit properties on the ground that he is entitled to be protected under the Cultivating Tenants Protection Act. The respondent filed I. A. No. 812 of 1972 for an order of interim injunction till the disposal of the suit under Order 59, rules 1 and 2, Civil Procedure Code. The petitioners herein filed I.A. No. 1110 of 1972 for vacating the ad interim injunction granted. The District Munsif took up both I. A.Nos. 812 and 1110 of 1972 and disposed of them by his order dated 3rd July, 1972. He held that there is a prima facie case made out by the respondent herein as lessee and as such he is entitled to protection by way of an interim injunction under Order 39, rules 1 and 2 Civil Procedur...
Tag this Judgment!Chennammal Vs. the Commissioner, for Hindu Religious and Charitable En ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-18-1973
Reported in: (1973)2MLJ442
M.M. Ismail, J.1. The second plaintiff in O.S No. 10 of 1966, on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Sivaganga, who continued the suit after the death of the first plaintiff, is the appellant herein. One Ambalam Thodda Mallappa Chettiar constructed a temple by name Pandurangaswami Temple in Aruppukottai. He executed a settlement deed in respect of this temple on 25th November, 1925 and a registration copy of the same has been marked as Exhibit A-3. This settlement deed was executed not only by Mallappa Chettiar, but also by his son, who was also known by the same name, as well as his wife Chennammal. This document stated that on the A schedule property the temple had been constructed and for the purpose of performing neivedyam and other religious rites in the temple, he had constructed a kitchen as well as other buildings and that they were executing the settlement deed so that the said religious rites might be performed permanently. The document proceeded to state that t...
Tag this Judgment!The Madras State Wakf Board, Madras Vs. Khazi Mohideen Sheriff
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Mad225
N.S. Ramaswami, J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal is against the judgment of Alagiriswami, J., who allowed the second appeal. The appellant before us is the Madras State Wakf Board, who was the defendant in the suit. The Board published under Section 5 of the Wakf Act, Central Act 29 of 1954, a Notification in the Fort St. George Gazette, stating that the property in dispute is a wakf. The plaintiff filed the suit out of which this appeal has arisen for a declaration of his title to the suit property and for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from taking any action in pursuance of the publication of the above said notification. The question was, whether the property was a wakf. According to the plaintiff, the property had been granted by a non-Muslim for the support of Kazi service and his case is that it would not be a wakf as defined in the Wakf Act. On the contrary, the case of the defendant-appellant has been that the property is a wakf. The learned Counsel for the appe...
Tag this Judgment!Universal Radiators Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-1973
Reported in: [1974]33STC341(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The dispute in this case relates to the turnover of Rs. 1,02,250. As regards this turnover, the assessee's contention before the assessing authority as well as before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was that it really represented works contracts and not transactions of sale. But both the assessing authority as well as the Appellate Assistant Commissioner rejected the assessee's contention and held that the turnover represented actual sales of oil-coolers and in that view, subjected the same to tax under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. Against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the assessee filed an appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. In the memorandum of grounds before the Tribunal the assessee raised the only question whether the transactions were works contracts or not. Later, at the time of the bearing of the appeal by the Tribunal, the assessee filed an application for leave to file additional grounds. The additional ground rai...
Tag this Judgment!Indian Steel Rolling Mills Vs. the State of Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-1973
Reported in: [1974]34STC445(Mad)
Ramanujam, J. 1. During the assessment year 1962-63, the petitioners in this case had sold iron and steel to Messrs. Slngareni Collieries Ltd., Andhra Pradesh, to the extent of Rs. 5,41,888.67 and to Messrs. Travancore Titanium Products Ltd., Trivandrum, to the extent of Rs. 19,134.72. The petitioners also sold to the Regional Housing Engineer, Hyderabad Housing Board, goods to an extent of Rs. 91,029.17. 2. As regards the sales made to the first two companies, who were registered dealers, the petitioners claimed to be taxed at the lower rate of 1 per cent instead of the normal rate of 2 per cent applicable to declared goods. They produced C forms from the said purchasing dealers. But the C form declarations had specified the purpose of purchase as manufacture or mining. Those C forms were held by the authorities to be defective in the sense that the goods have not been purchased for resale and only in cases of resale, the concessional rate of tax will be available in the case of decla...
Tag this Judgment!Loomchand Sait Vs. the Revenue Divisional Officer, Trichy and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-10-1973
Reported in: AIR1975Mad177
1. The first claimant in O. P. No. 140 of 1965 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Tiruchirappalli which arose out of a reference made under Sections 30 and 31(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of 1894) hereinafter referred to as the Act, is the appellant herein. An extent of 44 acres and 35 cents in S.F. Nos. 1/5-B and 1/6 in K. Sathanur village was acquired by the Revenue Divisional Officer. Tiruchirappalli, for construction of a Central Godown at Tiruchirappalli for the storage of foodgrains. By an award dated 24th April 1965, the Collector awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,600/- per acre and the total amount of compensation inclusive of the statutory solatium and interest from the date of taking possession came to Rs. 97.977.94. As the lands acquired stood registered in the names of Peerdhan Jusarmal Salt, the father of the appellant herein, the fourth Respondent herein (the fourth claimant) and the fifth Respondent herein (the fifth claimant), the Co...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »