Chennai Court September 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.
Tiruvallurammal Vs. Kullachiammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-08-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Mad283; (1977)1MLJ306
1. This appeal has been filed against an order of the lower court directing the summons to issue to the alleged lunatic for appearance before court on 8-3-1976 under S. 41 of the Indian Lunacy Act.2. The respondent herein filed a petition, O. P. 8 of 1975, under S. 38 of the Act seeking an order of inquisition alleging that her husband Rajappan is a lunatic and that he is of unsound mind and incapable of managing himself and his affairs. The said petition is being contested by the appellant herein who is the mother of the said Rajappan. The appellant has filed her counter in the said petition stating that Rajappan became subject to hallucinations soon after his marriage with the respondent, that after the respondent left him to lead a life of her own, after getting a divorce from him according to custom in the community, Rajappan became subject to first of depression losing interest in life, that he answered questions if in proper mood, and would not like to engage in conversation with...
Ramaswamy Padayachi Vs. Rangaswami Padayachi (Died) and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-08-1976
Reported in: (1977)2MLJ51
V. Ramaswami, J.1. The defendant is the appellant. The suit was filed for specific performance of an agreement to reconvey dated 4th August, 1966. The respondents-plaintiff's were the owners originally of the suit property. By sale deed dated 4th August, 1966 they conveyed the property to the defendant for a sum of Rs. 4,000. On the same day the defendant executed the agreement to re-convey the property on receipt of Rs. 4,280 within a period of two years from 4th August, 1966. On 12th June, 1968 the plaintiff issued the lawyer's notice Exhibit B-2 under which after pointing out that the defendant was under obligation to reconvey the property on receipt of Rs. 4,280 under the agreement of reconveyance stating that the plaintiffs were to pay the money before the Sub-Registrar and called upon the defendant to execute the reconveyance on 10th July, 1968. On the ground that the defendant had not conveyed his willingness to execute the sale deed, the suit was filed for specific performance....
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Wheel and Rim Company of India Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-07-1976
Reported in: [1977]107ITR168(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 assessee was entitled to rebate under the provisions of Clause 2(5)(a) of the Finance Act, 1966, on the cash subsidy of Rs. 1,60,717 received from the Engineering and Export Promotion Council and on the sum of Rs. 4,83,856 representing the income derived from sale of import entitlements ?'2. The short facts which gave rise to the above reference are these :The assessee is a company carrying on business in the manufacture and sale of cycle rims. Consequently, the assessee is engaged in the production of engineering goods and some of the goods are exported abroad. The Government had introduced more than one scheme to encourage such exports. Under one of the schemes, the assessee became e...
R. Chakravarthy Vs. M. Dhana Singh and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-07-1976
Reported in: (1977)1MLJ407
Kailasam, C.J.1. These two appeals are filed against the order of Mohan, J., in W.P. No. 2293 of 1973. That petition was filed by one Dhana Singh for the issue of a writ of certiorari calling for the order dated 11th October, 1972 on the file of the General Manager, Integral Coach Factory, Madras, and quashing the same. In that writ petition Dhana Singh made the Chief Mechanical Engineer, General Manager, Chairman, Railway Board, and the Union of India, as the first four respondents, and Chakravarthi as the fifth respondent. The facts of the case are briefly as follows. Upto 25th March, 1970 selection to the nine grades like lathe-carpenter, fitter, etc., was made in accordance with a common roster maintained. Under the common roster for the nine grades a reservation of 12 1/2 per cent of seats for the Scheduled Caste and 5 per cent for the Scheduled Tribes was provided. By a circular dated 29th April, 1970, the representation for the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes was increased ...
M. Appachi Gounder and ors. Vs. Superintendent of Central Excise and o ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-03-1976
Reported in: 1978(2)ELT549(Mad)
Koshal, J.1. By this judgment, I shall dispose of six petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, viz. W.P. Nos.630 and 980 to 984 of 1972 in each of which the petitioner is a manufacturer of cotton fabrics in a factory commonly known as powerlooms and challenges an order of the Superintendent of Central Excise, Tirupur circle, refusing to allow him the benefit of the special procedure detailed in Section E-III of Chapter V of the Central Excise Rules there in after referred to as the Rules) and imposing on him a penalty under the provisions of Sub-rule (2) of Rule 9 of the Rules. The prayer made in each of the, petitions is that the said order be quashed by a writ of certiorari on the ground of illegality.2. In all the petitions, the facts are identical and may, therefore, be given with reference only to one of them, viz. W.P. No. 630 of 1972. On the 27th February 1967, the petitioner made an application in pursuance of the provisions of Rule 96-1 of the Rules to the Col...
Nachar and ors. Vs. Palanisamy and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-03-1976
Reported in: (1977)2MLJ306
A. Varadarajan, J.1. Plaintiffs 2 to 7 who succeeded in the trial Court but failed in the lower appellate Court are the appellants. The deceased first plaintiff and appellants 1 to 4 filed the suit for a declaration of their title to the suit properties and for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with their possession and enjoyment of the properties or in the alternative, for recovery of possession of the properties with damages of Rs. 100.2. The first plaintiff who died pending the suit was the wife of Nattanmai Chella Goundar and plaintiffs 2 to 4, 6 and 7 are the daughters and the fifth plaintiff (fourth appellant) is the widow of their deceased son Doraisamy. Plaintiffs 6 and 7 (appellants 5 and 6) have been added as the legal representatives of the first plaintiff. The defendants are the pangalis of Chella Gounder.3. The suit properties consist of two items, namely, 1 acre and 46 cents of dry lands comprised in S. No. 169/56 and 2 acres and 14 cents ...
Sadhu V. Narayanaswami Pillai Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-02-1976
Reported in: [1977]39STC307(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. These tax revision cases relate to the assessment years 1961-62, 1964-65, 1966-67, 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70. The assessee is a Sidha Vaidya and is the proprietor of Raja Rajeswari Sidha Vaidya Salai. It has its office at Triplicane and also an Oushadalaya at Vayapathi, Mamandoor Village, Chingleput District. The assessing authority under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act treated the assessee as a dealer in Sidha medicines, tooth-paste, hair-oil, etc. and treated the receipts by him from the sales of such medicines, etc., as turnover exigible to tax under the provisions of the Act. The assessee contested the assessments before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and, being unsuccessful there, further took up the matter on appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal in its common order dated 8th February, 1972, dismissed the appeals and allowed the enhancement petition filed for the assessment year 1964-65. As far as 1964-65 was concerned, the Appell...
Sri Murugan and Co. Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-02-1976
Reported in: [1977]39STC422(Mad)
Ismail, J.1. This tax revision case preferred by the dealer lies within a very narrow compass. In the original assessment made in respect of the turnover, the turnover relating to the following items of foodgrains were assessed at 1 per cent as provided for in the proviso to Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 : Samai arisi, thinai arisi, irungu chola arisi, irungu chola kurunai and kudiraivali arisi. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened and the turnover relating to these items were assessed at 2 per cent on the basis that these items do not fall within the scope of the proviso to Section 3(1). The assessee's objections were overruled and the assessment at 2 per cent was confirmed by all the authorities including the Tribunal. Hence the present tax revision case.2. The proviso to Section 3(1), as it stood during the relevant period, namely, assessment year 1964-65, was as follows :Provided that-(i) in the case of foodgrains, namely, wheat, paddy (rice in hus...
V. Ponnammal Vs. K. Shanmughasundaran Represented by Power Agent Rajam ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-02-1976
Reported in: (1977)2MLJ10
ORDERG. Ramanujam, J.1. This appeal is directed against an order of the lower Court refusing to stay the execution of the decree in O.S. No. 531 of 1973 on its file on the ground that the appellant is not entitled to the benefit of the Tamil Nadu Indebted Agriculturists (Temporary Relief) Act, 1975 hereinafter referred to as Act X of 1975.2. The respondent herein obtained a decree against the appellant in O.S. No. 531 of 1973 for recovery of a sum of Rs. 10,001 being the advance paid by him in pursuance of an agreement of sale entered into with the appellant. He thereafter filed E.P. No. 148 of 1975 for the sale of the property which was the subject-matter of the agreement of sale. At that stage, the appellant filed an application E.A. No. 735 of 1975, claiming that as an agriculturist he is entitled to the benefit of Act X of 1975, and, therefore he is entitled to an order of stay of all further proceedings in the execution petition. This application was resisted by the respondent on ...
B. Thirumalai Pillai Vs. S. Ramalingam and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-02-1976
Reported in: (1977)2MLJ119
ORDERA.D. Koshal, J.1. Till the 31st December, 1970 respondent No. 1 held the post of karnam in village Melkaripur on a permanent basis. He absented himself from duty without leave and with effect from the 1st January, 1974, the petitioner was appointed a village karnam instead on a temporary basis by the Tahsildar, Chengam whose order was confirmed on the 29th March, 1971 by the Revenue Divisional Officer (hereinafter referred to as the R.D.O.). Later on respondent No. 1 returned to duty and by his order dated the 27th November, 1971, the R.D.O. permitted the first respondent to join duty again. It is this last mentioned order of the R.D.O. that is challenged by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer that is be quashed by a writ of certiorari.2. The filling up of vacancies in the office of a village karnam is regulated by the Tamil Nadu Village Officers Service Rules, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules), of which Rules 6, 7, 13 and 14 are ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »