Chennai Court October 1977 Judgments
Kumaraswami Gounder and ors. Vs. D.R. Nanjappa Gounder (Dead) and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-28-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Mad285
Veeraswami, C.J.1. This reference comes before us because of the conflict of opinion on the question whether Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act 1956 is applicable to a case where a husband died intestate before the Act came into force and his widow inherited his properties, but was not possessed of those properties and died subsequent to the commencement of the Act. One of us was a party to the reference. Since then has come Daya Singh v. Dhankaur : [1974]3SCR528 which, in almost similar circumstances and after dealing with the conflict of opinion of some oi the High Courts, answered the question in the affirmative.2. Were the question res integra, it would have been open to debate and doubt as to whether Section 8 was intended to cover reversionary succession as in the instant case. The Act was, no doubt, intended to amend and codify the law regarding intestate succession. The intention of the Act was to cover, as far as possible, the entire field. That was why Section 4 gave the A...
Tag this Judgment!N.K. Paramasivam Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-28-1977
Reported in: 1979(4)ELT14(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The petitioner is a licensed dealer in tobacco and held a licence No. L. 5 No. 6/67. He also owned a private bonded warehouse at Coimbatore. On 13-3-1969 the Officers of the Central Excise Department inspected the petitioner's warehouse and examined the stock of tobacco from 13-3-1969 to 17-3-1969 in respect of stock card No. 93/1961-Part II item No. 9. The stock card showed that varieties stored were 'Choodi' and 'Thindu' and the aggregate weight of the stock of 129 bundles was 7,627 kilograms. But on actual weighment at the time of inspection it was found that 129 bundles, which were stocked, measured only 4,561 kilograms. When questioned about the shortage in weight the petitioner explained that the shortage might be due to natural causes, such as dryage. The authorities did not accept the petitioner's explantion, but doubted whether the tobacco found stocked in the warehouse at the time of the inspection was the same stock as has been recorded in the stock card. To ...
Tag this Judgment!Sha Bhoormull Buboothmull JaIn Vs. Joint Commercial Tax Officer, Sowca ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-28-1977
Reported in: [1978]41STC400(Mad)
ORDERRamanujam, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner prays for a writ of prohibition prohibiting the respondent from taking any further proceedings in pursuance of a notice dated 30th March, 1972, proposing to revise the assessment under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act for the year 1966-67.2. The petitioner is an assessee on the file of the respondent and for the year 1966-67 he had been originally assessed at a taxable turnover of Rs. 98,453.04 by an order of assessment dated 12th January, 1968. Subsequently, the petitioner was served on 3rd April, 1972, with a notice dated 30th March, 1972, proposing to revise that assessment on the ground that certain alleged transactions of sale had been omitted to be taxed. The petitioner by a requisition dated 17th April, 1972, asked for extension of time for filing reply to the said notice dated 30th March, 1972. Since the petitioner apprehended that the assessing authority may finalise the revised assessment without waiting for its o...
Tag this Judgment!R.R. Dalavai Vs. the Government of Tamil Nadu by the Secretary to Gove ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-27-1977
Reported in: (1978)1MLJ93
ORDERG. Ramanujam, J.1. The petitioner prays for a writ of mandamus from this Court to restrain the respondents herein from levying, revising or collecting the property tax on the land and buildings belonging to the petitioners at No. 83, Big Street, Madras-5 on the basis of its plinth area, contrary to the provisions of the Madras City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919.2. The first respondent is the State of Tamil Nadu and the second respondent is the Corporation of Madras. According to the petitioner as soon as he came to know that the Corporation of Madras had proposed to revise the property tax leviable on the properties in the City of Madras adopting the plinth area as the basis, he wrote to respondents 1 and 2, as a rate-payer, as the representative of the City Cleaning Campaign, and as the Secretary of the Native Residents Association of the Madras City, pointing out that the Corporation has no jurisdiction to assess levy or collect property tax on the basis of the plinth area as ...
Tag this Judgment!The Madras State Wakf Board by Its Secretary Vs. Vellayan Chettiar and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-27-1977
Reported in: (1978)1MLJ542
A. Varadarajan, J.1. The Madras State Wakf Board represented by its Secretary, the plaintiff in the 38 suits filed before the District Munsif, Tirumangalam for recovery of possession of the suit properties with past and future mesne profits who failed in both the Courts below on the question of the Civil Court's jurisdiction to entertain the suits is the appellant in these second appeals. The properties involved in O.S. No. 232 of 1968 out of which S.A. No. 271 of 1974 has arisen are situate in Ponmeni Village, Madurai Taluk. The properties involved in the other suits out of which the other appeals arise are situate in certain other villages in Nilakottai Taluk. The properties in the suits were admittedly minor Inams which were abolished by the Tamil Nadu Minor Inams (Abolition, and Conversion, into Ryotwari) Act, 1963 (Madras Act XXX of 1963) with effect from 15th February, 1965. The Wakf Act (XXIX of 1954), waspassed by the Parliament to provide for the better administration and supe...
Tag this Judgment!Mariyam Bivi and ors. Vs. Natharsa Rowther Trust
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-26-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Mad244
Balasubrahmanyan, J.1. These two second appeals raise a common question as to the validity of registration of a trust deed executed by one Natharsa Rowther on 26-6-1920. The question arises this way. The founder's son, Abdul Khader, succeeding as trustee, alienated the properties of the Trust as though they were his own, not disclosing that they were inalienable trust properties. After Abdul Khader's death, the grandson of the founder became trustee. Acting on behalf of the trust, he sued the alienees for a declaration and possession, contending that the alienations were void having been made in breach of trust. The alienees resisted the suits. One of the defences raised by them was that the trust itself was invalid since the deed of trust had not been validly registered. This contention, as well as others, were rejected by both the courts below and the suits were decreed in favour of the Trust as prayed for. The alienees have now come in further appeal before this court.2. Mr, R. N. K...
Tag this Judgment!Workmen of Ramajayam Transports Vs. Management, Ramajayam Transports a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-26-1977
Reported in: (1978)ILLJ131Mad
ORDERMohan, J.1. The workmen are the petitioners before me. The first respondent-management is a transport concern started some time in 1938 and has made substantial progress. There are about 75 permanent workmen in the respondent-concern. They raised an industrial dispute regarding bonus for the years 1971-72 and 1972-73.The demand was that they were entitled to what is called customary or traditional bonus paid at the time of Deepavali festival every year equivalent to three months' total wages for each of the two years concerned They also stated that right from the inception of the concern they were getting bonus, initially at the rate of one month's salary, which was increased to two months' salary, then in 1961-62 it was paid at 20 per cent and in 1962-63 at 22 per cent of the total wages. From the financial year 1963 64, on the basis of an agreement entered into under Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), it was increased to 25 per cen...
Tag this Judgment!Santhakula Sowmiyanarayana Kavaraya Community Endowments, Through Its ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-26-1977
Reported in: (1978)1MLJ354
N.S. Ramaswami, J.1. The suit out of which this second appeal arises is for declaration of title and for possession of a building described as 'kavadi madam'. The suit is filed by the Santhakula Sowmiyanarayana Kavaraya Community Endowments through its trustees. The title is claimed under Exhibits A-1 to A-3. The building was said to belong originally, to Ramalinga Pillai and that he mortgaged the property to a third party. There was a suit on the mortgage and, in execution of the decree, it came to be sold in Court auction. Exhibit A-1 dated 24th July, 1923, in the sale certificate issued to the auction purchaser, viz., Palaniappa Pillai, of the property. Delivery of possession was taken as evidenced by Exhibit A-2, the certified copy of the delivery athakshi. The auction-purchaser sold the property to one Subba Naicker under Exhibit A-3 dated 22nd November, 1923. It is the case of the plaintiff that Subba Naicker purchased the property not for his individual purpose but only for the ...
Tag this Judgment!Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras-i Vs. Late A. K. Lakshmi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-24-1977
Reported in: [1978]113ITR368(Mad)
P. GOVINDAN NAIR C.J. - The same question arises for consideration in these tax references. They relate to the assessments to income-tax of three directors of the Midland Theatres Private Ltd. In T.C. Nos. 219 and 390 of 1974 the director concerned is A. K. Ramachandran, who, at the time of the assessment, was no more. These two cases deal with respectively the assessments for the years 1967-68, 1968-69,1 1969-70 and 1970-71. The question of law referred to this court in T.C. No. 219 of 1974 is in these terms :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the sum of Rs. 7,142 and Rs. 10,396 were not includible in the hands of the assessee under the provisions of section 17(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment years 1967-68 and 1968-69, respectively ?'The questions of law referred in T.C. No. 390 of 1974 read as follows :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was ri...
Tag this Judgment!South India Flour Mills (P) Ltd. Vs. Regional P.F. Commissioner
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-21-1977
Reported in: (1978)ILLJ101Mad
Mohan, J.1. In this case what falls for my determination is the scope of Section 14B of the Employees' Provident Fund Act and Family Pension Fund Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and the manner of exercise of the power by the concerned authority. The short facts leading to the writ petition are as follows: There was a closure of the petitioner-mills between 8-3-1972 and 10-7-1972 owing to strike. On 7-8-1972, the Management paid the salary for the month of March, 1972, and a portion for the month of July, 1972. On 12-8-1972, the Provident Fund contribution for the month of February, 1972 was remitted. Normally speaking, that remittance should have been made on or before 15-3-1972. Thereupon, it was called by a notice dated 26-10-1974 to show-cause why damages should not be levied under Section 14B of the Act. A reply was sent on 31-10.1974 stating that the remittance could not be made in view of the strike that had taken place between 8-3-1972 and 10-7-1972 and the reason...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »