Chennai Court March 1976 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.
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Smt. S.M. Muthukaruppi Achi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-1976
Reported in: [1977]109ITR345(Mad)
V. Ramaswami, J. 1. One S. M. Muthiah Chettiar, who was domiciled in India, passed away on November 15, 1963, His wife filed the estate duty account as the accountable person. In the return, the accountable person included certain immovable properties, shares in companies and outstandings, which were in her name, also as the estate passing on the death of her husband. Later on, she claimed that the value of the assets standing in her name should be excluded on the ground that though the consideration for purchasing those assets proceeded from the deceased, he intended to give them to her as gift and that, therefore, they were her absolute properties and could not be included in the estate of the deceased.2. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty, after considering a number of circumstances including a will, in which the deceased claimed all these properties as his and standing benami in the name of his wife, came to the conclusion that these assets were purchased by the deceased benam...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mlm. Mahalingam Chettiar (Deceased by L ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-1976
Reported in: [1977]107ITR236(Mad)
V. Ramaswami, J.1. These tax cases relate to the assessment years 1960-61 and 1961-62. The assesssee is a Hindu undivided family which returned property income as well as its various other business incomes. During the accounting years relating to these assessment years there were certain transactions of sale of plots in the area known as Mahalingapuram in Madras. It was claimed by Sri Mahalingam Chettiar, the karta of Hindu undivided family, that these lands had been inherited by him from his father, who in turn had purchased the same in court auction in 1925. The money-lending business of the family was closed some time in the year 1940. It is common ground that though these properties were originally acquired in the course of the family money-lending business, as far as the assessee was concerned these properties were inherited not as assets of any business. The total extent of the lands measured 503 grounds. The assessees prepared a lay out for disposing of these lands some time in ...
Govindaraj Vs. Alamelu Ammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-1976
Reported in: (1977)1MLJ348
ORDERS. Suryamurthy, J.1. This civil revision petition is directed against the order of the learned District Munsif, Thiruvaiyaru, dismissing a petition filed by the first defendant to stay the trial of O.S. No, 105 of 1973. The petition, was filed under Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Ordinance No. 1 of 1975. The contention of the first defendant was that as he is a cultivating tenant and as the suit is not only for recovery of possession of the suit land, but also for profits past and future, the suit cannot be proceeded with for the time being because of the provisions of Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Ordinance No. 1 of 1975. Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Ordinance No. 1 of 1975 reads as follows:4. Stay of proceedings: (1) All further proceedings in suits and application of the nature mentioned in Section 3 in which relief is claimed against an agriculturist, not being proceedings for the amendment of pleadings or for the addition, substitution, or the striking off of parties, but otherwise inclusive o...
T.M. Santhakumari Vs. Narasinga Mudaliar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-1976
Reported in: (1976)2MLJ211
S. Suryamurthy, J.1. These civil revision petitions, six in number, have been preferred against the order of the learned appellate authority reversing the order of the learned Rent Controller directing the eviction of the tenants. The respondents in all the civil revision petitions are in occupation of different portions of the building belonging to the civil revision petitioner heroin as tenants from month to month. The landlady filed six petitions for their eviction on the ground that she wanted possession of the building for the purpose of demolition and reconstruction. The learned Rent Controller found that the petitions were bonafide, that the landlady had done all that she need do at that stage, as preparation for demolition and reconstruction of the building, that the building was sufficiently old to require demolition and reconstruction and that the landlady had sufficient means to demolish the building and reconstruct another building on the site thereof. However, on appeal th...
P.K. Govindan Vs. the Secretary to Government, Home Department and anr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Mad28
Kailasam, OFFG.C.J. 1. This appeal is filed by the Proprietor, Gokal Agencies, the petitioner in the writ petition, against the order of Ramanujam, J., holding that the order of the Secretary to Government, Home Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, exempting the premises No. 22 Royapettah High Road, Madras, from the provisions of S. 29 of the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, at the instance of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner was not erroneous. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, the second respondent purchased the premises for Rs. 13,19,257 on 25-9-1968. There were several shops in the premises and they were occupied by tenants. In March 1975, the second respondent applied to the first respondent for exemption of the premises under Sec. 29 of the Act on the ground that there had been considerable expansion of his office, that the existing office accommodation in the compound was very inadequate and that considerable difficulties were felt in providing the ...
Sri Mayuranathaswami Devasthanam, by Its Sole and Hy. Trustee Sri-la-s ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-19-1976
Reported in: (1977)1MLJ336
C. J. R. Paul, J.1. This appeal arises under the following circumstances; The appellant-Devasthanam filed a suit O.S. No. 123 of 1962 before the District Munsif of Mayuram for possession of the suit site after removing the superstructure put up by the respondents-defendants. The said suit was subsequently transferred to the District Munsif's Court, Nagapattinam and numbered as O.S. No. 268 of 1965 and a decree was passed ex parte on 29th July, 1966 on the defendants' counsel reporting no instructions and the defendants being absent and set ex parte. The decree directs the defendants to deliver possession of the property to the appellant after removing the superstructure put up by them. The description of the property as given in the decree is that it is situated in the 4th Ward T.S. No. 280 having an area of 27,378 sq. ft. with the trees and other plants on it. The respondents-defendants filed a petition to set aside that ex parte decree but it was dismissed and against that order of d...
Santhakumari Vs. Gurumurthy and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-19-1976
Reported in: (1976)2MLJ432
ORDERP.R. Gokulakrishnan, J.1. The 2nd Respondent, Santha-kumari in M.R.I. 117(R) NNL (A3) before the Authorised Officer (Land Reforms), Mayuram is the revision petitioner herein. Proceedings were taken against the revision petitioner and Ammani Ammal in respect of the lands belonging to the said petitioner and Ammani Ammal. A draft statement was published under Section 10(1) of Act LVIII of 1961. The first respondent feerern filed objections under Section 10(5) of the said Act stating that the lanas stated in the objection; petition have to be excluded from the holdings of Radha-krishna Naidu as he happened to be a life estate holder. According to the objector, the lands mentioned in the objection petition are vested in him and hence the same has to be deleted from the holdings and further proceedings taken in the light of the objections. The petitioner and the second respondent herein contended that the objector has no right, title or interest in the property mentioned in his objecti...
Yercaud Coffee Curing Works Ltd. Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-18-1976
Reported in: [1977]40STC531(Mad)
V. Ramaswami, J.1. T. C. Nos. 298 to 300 and 314 of 1971 relate to the assessment years 1962-63 to 1965-66 and T. C. No. 305 of 1971 relates to the assessment year 1966-67. The assessee in all these cases is the same. The assessees are dealers in fertilisers, manure mixtures and rock phosphate, etc. They purchased number of items of chemical fertilisers both locally and also from outside the State. In some cases, they mixed organic chemicals in various proportions and manufactured different types of mixture manures called 'tea manure', 'coffee manure', etc. Under item 21 of the First Schedule to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, the chemical fertilisers enumerated in that item are to be taxed at single point on the point of first sale in the State. After enumerating 15 items of chemical fertilisers, the entry further provided that any mixture of one or more of the articles mentioned therein with one or more of the organic manures would also come within that entry. In the assessment...
N. Sundareswaran Vs. Sri Krishna Refineries
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-18-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Mad109; (1977)1MLJ51
Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. The unsuccessful defendant in O. S. No. 239 of 1970 on the file of the Subordinate Judge of Erode is the appellant. The plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 43,875/- and costs which according to him was damages payable by the defendant consequent upon his nonperformance of a major portion of three agreed contracts he entered into according to him on 15-11-1969, 16-12-1969 and during the third week of January, 1970. The plaintiff's case is that the defendant is a manufacturer and dealer of empty tin containers at Quilon, and he being a businessman dealing in groundnut oil and refined oil, placed orders on three different prices for varied quantities and those contracts are evidenced in writing excepting the last of them and the defendant accepted such contracts but failed to perform the same in full and therefore he was entitled to claim such damages which flowed from the breach of contract committed by the defendant. The defendant's case is that it ...
The Shipping Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. the Metal Box Co. of India ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-17-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Mad101
1. This appeal is preferred by the defendant in C. S. 3 of 1968, the Shipping Corporation of India Ltd., against the judgment and decree of N. S. Ramaswami J. That was a suit filed by the Metal Box Co. of India Ltd., for payment of a sum of Rs. 23,769, with interest. The plaintiff imported certain quantity of tin plates from Japan. The goods imported had been insured with the New Zealand Insurance Co. Ltd., which is the second plaintiff in the suit. When the ship arrived at the Madras Port on 30-12-1966, it was found that the consignment of the plates were wet. A survey was made and it was found that quite a number of tin plates were damaged. After the surveyor's report, the first plaintiff made a claim for damages to the extent of Rs. 1, 23, 769. The Insurer, the second plaintiff, accepted the claim of the first plaintiff and paid the said amount. The suit for recovery of the said amount is based on the ground that the damage to the goods being while the good were carried by the ship,...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »