Chennai Court June 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.
A.D.K. Rangaswami Raju Vs. the Municipal Chairman, Rajapalayam and ors ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-23-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Mad287
1. The eight defendant in C. S. No. 29 of 1956 on the file of this Court is the appellant before us. One Rao Bahadur A.K.D. Dharma Raja since deceased, founded a trust, called the Dharma Raja Educational Charity Trust, Rajapalayam. There were disputes in the working of the trust and the matter came up before this Court and a scheme was settled, in C. S. No. 29 of 1956. The purport of the scheme was that each of the sons of the founder, A. K. D. Dharma Raja, was to manage that trust for three years successively. Cl. 3 of the scheme provided that the trustee manager shall be nominated by the District Judge of Ramanathapuram from among the male members of the founder's family according to seniority and the right of each of the five sons of the founder and the male members of each branch to hold the office for a period of three years in rotation by turns, unless disqualified. Regarding the actual management. Cl. 23 provided that the trustee-manager would be entitled to nominate a deputy to...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. South Madras Electric Supply Corporatio ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-1976
Reported in: [1977]109ITR426(Mad)
Ismail, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench, under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the income-tax authorities were not justified in deducting a sum referable to the contribution made by the private consumers in determining the actual cost of the house service connections which were given prior to April 1, 1961, for the purpose of allowing depreciation on the written down value for the assessment years 1962-63 to 1967-68?'2. The assessee is a company carrying on business in the distribution of electricity. In the return filed for the assessment year 1962-63, the assessee showed a sum of Rs. 7,07,990 as written down value of the capital expenditure incurred for laying house service connections prior to the previous year, relevant to the assessment year 1962-63, and claimed...
Epoh, Indian Overseas Bank. Vs. S.M. Mohamed Musthaba Sahib and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Mad199; (1977)1MLJ349
1. This appeal is preferred by the India Overseas Bank, Epoh, by its power agent, Joseph Ambrose, against the judgment of Ramaprasada Rao, J. in A. A. O. No. 230 of 1966.2. The appellant filed an application under S. 44-A read with O, XXI, Rs. 54 and 66, C. P. Code, for attachment and sale of the judgment-debtor's immoveable properties, in the District Court of South Arcot. The District Judge ordered notice and transferred it to the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge. The decree that was sought to be executed was one that was obtained in a foreign court, viz., the Federation of Malaysia.3. The objection that was raised to the execution of the foreign decree was that notice under O, XXI, R. 22, C. P. Code was mandatory before attachment could be ordered, and that, secondly the supervening insolvency of the judgment-debtor in the Federation of Malaysia was a bar to the maintainability of the execution petition. It is common ground that after the decree was passed by the foreign c...
Avery India Limited Vs. Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensa ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-1976
Reported in: (1978)ILLJ92Mad
ORDERP.S. Kailasam, C.J.1. This appeal is filed by Avery India Limited, Madras against the order of Ramanujam, J., in W.P. No. 3485 of 1974. The second respondent Lawrence was employed as sales representative in the appellant's services at Madras. He was employed as such under Ext. A.5 with effect from 1-12-1972. His services were terminated under Ext. A. 6 on 11-1-1973. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal, he filed a petition under Section 41(2) of the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishment Act, to the Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Madras. The Commissioner found that the second respondent was a 'person employed', and would come within the definition of that term under the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act and that as such he was entitled to the benefits of the Act. The appellant filed the writ petition praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari and to quash the order. The learned Judge, after considering the evidence in the case, set aside the order of the f...
Venkitachalam Vs. V. Subramania Pillai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-21-1976
Reported in: 1978CriLJ121
ORDERRatnavel Pandian, J.1. The criminal revision case is against the order of the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Usilampatty dismissing the petition in C. M. P. No. 270 of 1974 in so far as the respondent herein is concerned,2. One Venkitachalam, petitioner herein, as trustee of Sri Alagarasamy Madam, Allinagaram village, Periakulam Taluk and in pursuance of the certificate issued to him by the Deputy Commissioner, H. R, & C. E. (Administration) Department, Madurai Under Section 101 of the H. R. & C. E. Act, has filed the said C.M.P. No. 270 of 1974 in the court of Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Usilampatty for directing the respondents 1 to 10 to deliver the temple properties mentioned in the schedule attached to the petition. The first respondent is reported to have expired. Except the 6th respondent the other respondents have filed petition stating that they have no objection for the petition being allowed. The 6tti respondent alone has filed a counter stating that he is a bona f...
Ramanathan Ambalam and anr. Vs. Shanmugavel Pillai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-21-1976
Reported in: (1977)1MLJ168
Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. On leave granted by Ramanujam, J., these Letters Patent Appeals are before us. The appellants in L.P.A No. 30 of 1973 are defendants 2 and 12 in the original suit, who are the alienees of certain properties which constituted the subject-matter of that suit. Appellant in L.P.A. No. 38 of 1974, is the plaintiff in that .suit. It will be convenient to extract the full judgment of Ramanujam, J., which is very analystical and explanatory as regards facts of the case which go back to nearly four decades before. In order to avoid repetition and waste of judicial time we thought it fit to incorporate in our judgment the judgment of Ramanujam, J., so that for the purpose of continuity, the facts as related by the learned Judge, which are not in dispute before us, may be taken as representing the correct position in relation to the relationship as well as the rights inter se as between the parties. The judgment of Ramanujam, J. runs as follows:These two second appeals arise...
Rangasami Gounder Vs. Periamuthu Gounder and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-17-1976
Reported in: (1977)1MLJ231
Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. The primary suits, which were tried in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of East Coimbatore, are connected, in the sense that an adjudication in one will have an impact on the other. We shall now succinctly state the facts in the second appeal. The second appeal arises Out of Original Suit No. 77 of 1968 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Erode, which was decreed in the first instance by the trial Court. On appeal to the learned District Judge of Coimbatore-East, the judgment and decree of the trial Court were set aside. One Rangaswamy Gounder whom we shall characterise as the plaintiff in the specific performance suit, filed the same for specific performance of an agreement of sale marked as Exhibit A-4 in that suit The main allegations of the plaintiff in this suit were that on 29th June, 1967 defendants 1 and 2, who are the father and the eldest son, contracted to sell certain properties described in the agreement itself for a sum and conside...
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. S.A. Rahman Beevi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-16-1976
Reported in: [1978]111ITR422(Mad)
Ismail, J. 1. The following two questions of law have been referred to this court for its opinion under Section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench, at the instance of the Controller of Estate Duty, Madras:'(1) Whether, on the facts arid in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the additions amounting to Rs. 28,000 could not be sustained on the ground that the provisions of sections 9 and 10 of the Estate Duty Act were not applicable ? (2) Whether, on the materials on record, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that there was no goodwill at all for the retail business carried on by the firm A. M, Saliah and Company and accordingly deleting an addition of Rs. 23,374 ?' 2. One A. M. Saliah, who died on March 9, 1966, was one of the three partners in a firm called A. M. Saliah and Company, carrying on retail business in the purchase and sale of textiles at Mayuram. The firm was reco...
Southern and Rajamani Transports (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income- ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-15-1976
Reported in: [1977]107ITR470(Mad)
Ismail, J.1. The question referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench, under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for its opinion, relates to a claim of the assessee for deduction of a sum of Rs. 20,000 paid by it to the Congress Party as donation. 2. The Income-tax Officer who dealt with the matter at the initial stage pointed out that he was not able to follow as to how the said donation could be allowed as an 'expenditure' as it was not incidental to the business. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner who disposed of the appeal preferred by the assessee stated that it was well-settled that donation to political parties cannot come in for allowance as business expenditure, and found that the action of the Income-tax Officer was justified. In the second appeal, the Tribunal pointed out that it heard the counsel for the assessee as well as the departmental representative who relied on the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Indian Steel and Wire P...
M.S. Krishna Iyengar Vs. Krishna and Co. and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-15-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Mad90
Kailasam, C.J.1. This appeal is filed by the fourth defendant in O. S. No. 3 of 1973 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Tuticorin, against the order passed in E. P. No. 170 of 1974 in the said suit. The plaintiff therein file the suit for recovery of money due on mortgage dated 21-12-1960 for Rs. 10,000, executed by one Srinivasa Iyengar and the appellant herein in favour of the plaintiff. On 23-2-1974, a preliminary decree was passed and also passed. The decree-holder filed E. P. 170 f 1974 for sale of the hypotheca. The sale was posted to 3-9-1975. At this stage, the petition out of which this appeal arises was filed by the appellant for stay of execution proceedings under Tamil Nadu Ordinance 8 of 1975, which has now become the Tamil Nadu Indebted Person (Temporary Relief) Act, Act XLVIII of 1975.2. The question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the appellant is entitled to an order of stay of execution proceedings by virtue of Ordinance 8 of 1975 which has ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »