Chennai Court April 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.
R.V. Balasubramania Chettiar and ors. Vs. J.B.M. Mohammad Yahaya and o ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-28-1976
Reported in: (1977)1MLJ40
T. Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. In these petitions the question involved is whether the respondents are entitled under Section 10 (3) (a) (iii) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 to ask for possession of the portions in the occupation of each of these petitioners on the ground that one of the owners who owns the building required the property for his own non-residential activities. Admittedly, the respondents are the owners of the suit premises. They are of course co-owners not only knit by a bondage of kinship but also by a legal tie by which they have associated themselves together to own the suit premises. One of the respondents expressed a desire to setup a printing press. For that purpose, the respondents chose the building in the occupation of the petitioners as quite suitable for the commercial activity. All the respondents as co-owners filed the application under Section 10 (3) (a) (iii) of Act No. XVIII of 1960 for possession of the building in their respe...
B.C. Diocese of Madurai and anr. Vs. Ganapathy Iyer and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-28-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Mad52
ORDER1. The Petitioners, who are the landlords, filed R. C. O. P. Nos. 113, 115, 117, 119, 121, 123, 125, 131, 133, 135, 137, 157 and 195 of 1972 before the Rent Controller Madurai (District Munsif, Madurai Town) against various tenants for getting possession of the portions they are occupying. The eviction is prayed from on two grounds (1) Under Ss. 10(3)(b) and 14(1)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, Finding that the pleas for eviction the one under Section 10(3)(b) and the other, under Section 14(1)(b) are self-contradictory, the Rent Controller rejected the plea for eviction under Section 10(3)(b), but ordered eviction under Section 14(1)(b) on condition that the petitioners (landlords) give the statutory undertaking under Section 14(2)(b) within a period of one week from the date of the order.2. Aggrieved by the said order of eviction passed by the Rent Controller, the tenants preferred civil miscellaneous appeals individually,. By a common judgmen...
K.V. Kandasamy Gounder, President Negamam Town Panchayat Vs. the Colle ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-28-1976
Reported in: (1976)2MLJ182
ORDERS. Mohan, J.1. The short facts leading to this Writ Petition in which the petitioner prays for certiorari to quash the proceedings of the Collector (Inspector of Panchayats, Coimbatore District, Coimbatore), dated 21st March, 1976 are as follows ; In 1970, the petitioner was elected as the President of Negamam Town Panchayat. The electorate consists of voters on the electoral roll of the Town Panchayat. The sanctioned strength of the Panchayat is fifteen. On 22nd October, 1975, the respondent communicated to the petitioner certain charges and called upon him to show cause as to why action should not be taken under Section 149-A(1) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act (XXXV of 1958). The petitioner submitted his explanation. A meeting took place on 13th February, 1976 to ascertain the views of the members of the Panchayat about the removal of the petitioner from the Office of President. At that time, the petitioner protested against the convening of the meeting. This meeting was attend...
Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (C.T.) Vs. Vasantha Mills Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-26-1976
Reported in: [1976]38STC366(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. This matter has come before the Full Bench on an order of reference made by V. Ramaswami and Sethuraman, JJ., as they had felt that the correctness of the decision of the Division Bench in State of Tamil Nadu v. Cauvery Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. [1974] 33 S.T.C. 506. is open to doubt in view of the later decision of the Supreme Court in Mod. Serajuddin v. State of Orissa'.2. The assessee in this case is a dealer in cotton and cotton yarn. For the assessment year 1966-67, it had reported a total turnover of Rs. 2,83,45,614.33 and, out of the total turnover, a sum of Rs. 1,23,362.40 was claimed to represent sales of cotton yarn in the course of export. This claim was not accepted by the assessing authority, who held that the said turnover represented intra-State sales. On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner also upheld the view of the assessing authority. On a further appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, it was held that the said disputed turnover of...
The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Board of Revenue, Madras Vs. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-26-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Mad44; (1977)1MLJ218
1. This is a case referred by the Board of Revenue under Section 57 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. The respondents along with their father Kanthimathinatha Pillai had executed a sale deed dated 18-11-1967 in favour of one Thirumathi Nagammal in respect of the property bearing door No. 6 Munuswami Achari St, Siruvalloor, Madras. Under the said sale deed the house and ground bearing door No. 51 Seshachala Mudali St, Saidapet, Madras had been offered by the vendors and accepted by the vendees as indemnity against any loss, damage or claim in regard to the property conveyed. The vendors subsequently approached the vendee to release her right of indemnity over the said property bearing door No. 51 Seshachala Mudali St, Saidapet, madras and to accept instead another property bearing door No. 16 Pilliar Koil St, Saidapet, Madras as indemnity. The vendee agreed to the said proposal of the vendors and released her rights over the property given as indemnity under the sale deed, by means of a re...
The Deputy Commissioner (C.T.), Coimbatore Division Vs. Vasantha Mills ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-26-1976
Reported in: (1976)2MLJ524
ORDERG. Ramanujam, J.1. This matter has come before the Full Bench on an order of reference made by V. Ramaswami and Sethuraman, JJ., as they had felt that the correctness of the decision of the Division Bench in State of Tamil Nadu v. Cauveri Spinning and Weaving Mills Limited (1974) 33 S.T.C. 506 is open to doubt in view of the later decision of the Supreme Court in Mohammad Sirajudeen v. State of Orissa : AIR1975SC1564 .2. The assessee in this case is a dealer in cotton and cotton yarn. For the assessment year 1966-67 it had reported a total turnover of Rs. 2,83,45,614.33 and out of the total turnover, a sum of Rs. 1,23,362.40 was claimed to represent sales of cotton yarn in the course of export. This claim was not accepted by the assessing authority who held that the said turnover represented intra-State sales. On appeal, the appellate Assistant Commissioner also upheld the view of the assessing authority. On a further appeal to the Sales tax Appellate Tribunal, it was held that th...
M.N. Doraisami Vs. Bank of India
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-23-1976
Reported in: (1978)ILLJ94Mad
ORDERG. Ramanujam, J.1. The petitioner is a post-graduate in Mathematics with Statistics as special subject. In the year 1953 she was employed by the Reserve Bank. Later she resigned from the Reserve Bank and took up an officer's job with the Bank of India, the first respondent in or about 1961. By an order dated 30th October, 1968 she was transferred from Madras branch to the head office at Bombay. She made representations that in view of the fact that she has to attend on her aged parent at Madras, she may be retained in Madras. The head office after considering her request for retaining her in Madras, wrote back on 26th November, 1968 saying that she was specifically appointed as an officer in the Economics, Intelligence and Statistics Department of the Bank at Bombay, that her request for retention on two earlier occasions in May, 1964 and March, 1966 at Madras have been acceded to on, the alleged ground of domestic difficulties that it is no longer possible to consider her request...
P. Subramaniam Vs. M. Kandasamy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-23-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Mad96; (1977)1MLJ49
ORDER1. The non-speaking order of the learned District Munsif, Madurai Town has to be set aside. The order reads:'Notice of hearing given. Counter filed. Heard, Ex. A-1 marked. Petition allowed.'The petitioner is admittedly a Court auction purchaser. He purchased the property in execution of a decree obtained by the decree-holder as against the respondent judgment-debtor. It is not in dispute that the auction sale has not been set aside in a manner known to law. This obviously means that the respondent has accepted the public sale as also the title of the petitioner to the property which was the subject-matter of the Court sale. Pursuant to the certificate of title obtained by him, the petitioner filed an application for delivery of possession of the property under Order 21, Rule 95, Civil P. C. By that time, the Tamil Nadu Indebted Agriculturists (Temporary Relief) Act (10 of 1975) has come to the anvil as a statute. Taking advantage of the provisions of this Act, the respondent filed...
M.N. Doraisami Vs. the Bank of India and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-23-1976
Reported in: (1977)2MLJ60
ORDERG. Ramanujam, J.1. The petitioner is a post-graduate in Mathematics with Statistics as special subject. In the year 1953 she was employed by the Reserve Bank. Later she resigned from the Reserve Bank and took up an Officer's job with the Bank of India, the first respondent in or about 1961. By an order dated 30th October, 1968 she was transferred from Madras Branch to the Head Office at Bombay. She made representations that in view of the fact that she has to attend on her aged parent at Madras, she may be retained in Madras. The head office after considering her request for retaining her in Madras, wrote back on 26th November, 1968 saying that she was specifically appointed as an officer In the Economics, Intelligence and Statistics Department of the Bank at Bombay, that her request for retention on two earlier occasions in May, 1964 and March, 1966 at Madras have been acceded to on the alleged ground of domestic difficulties' that it is no longer possible to consider her request...
The Deputy Commissioner (C.T.) Vs. N. Pillar Chetty and Co.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-22-1976
Reported in: [1976]38STC342(Mad)
Ismail, J.1. This tax revision case is by the Deputy Commissioner (Commercial Taxes), Coimbatore, against the order of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Additional Bench), Coimbatore, dated 20th January, 1971.2. With regard to assessment to sales tax for 1967-68, the assessee reported a total and taxable turnover of Rs. 12,78,036.62 and Rs. 12,37,084.34 respectively. On verification of their accounts and after a series of inspections, the assessing officer determined the taxable turnover as Rs. 14,23,743.98 and also imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,500 under Section 12(3) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. On appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (Commercial Taxes), Coimbatore, the taxable turnover was re-fixed, making an addition of 7 1/2 per cent to the taxable turnover as per accounts, but the penalty was sustained. Against this order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the assessee preferred an appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal by the impugned order sust...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »