Chennai Court October 1977 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.
G. Duraikannu Vs. A. Natesa Pillai and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-07-1977
Reported in: (1978)1MLJ296
Sethuraman, J.1. The plaintiff's adopted son in O.S. No. 81 of 1970 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Mayuram is the appellant. One Ramaswami Pillai and a son of his brother Kolandavelayutham Pillai effected a partition between themselves on 26th July, 1969. In the said partition certain lands were kept out of division and reserved for certain religious purposes to be set out presently. The area so reserved was of the extent of 38 acres of lands situated in some villages in Thanjavur District. By a subsequent deed, dated 22nd September, 1969, there was same modification of the purpose for which the properties were reserved and a part of the properties originally shown in the document was also excluded. Ramaswami Pillai was to be in charge of doing the obligations contemplated by the said deed. The properties subsequently stood recorded in the name of the successors of the said Ramaswami Pillai. Suo motu proceedings under Section 63(f) and (g) of the Madras Hindu Reli...
G. Shanmugham Chetti and anr. Vs. Chinnammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-06-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Mad304
1. This is an appeal against the judgment of Mohan J. who on an application filed by the respondent in this appeal, revoked the Probate granted in favour of the appellants by Paul J. This order is dated 14-2-1974, whereunder he granted letters of administration to the will of one Alagirisami Chetti. The respondent applicant has briefly stated in the affidavit in support of the Judge's summons for revocation as follows:--2. She was admittedly a person to whom notice was ordered before the grant was made. But according to the respondent such a notice which was served on her on 12-1-1974, was not accompanied by the copy of the petition filed for the grant and that no publication was made about the date of hearing of the testamentary proceedings and that she sought for inspection of the records as per order of the Master of this court dated 19-3-1974 and it was only thereafter she entered caveat. But as by then the letters of administration was ordered on 14-2-1974, the respondent's allega...
The State of Tamil Nadu Vs. the Madras Motor Parts Dealers' Associatio ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-06-1977
Reported in: [1978]42STC243(Mad)
P. Govindan Nair, C.J.1. These revisions are taken by the revenue against the order of the Tribunal holding that the turnover of Rs. 2,07,878.77 representing the alleged sales effected by the Madras Motor Parts Dealers' Association to its members are not taxable and they are really and in law sales in the course of import. The short question is whether the said turnover for the year 1971-72 is taxable under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. While the revenue contends that the turnover represented local sales coming under that head, on behalf of the assessee it was contended that those sales were in the course of import and that if that contention is not accepted, it is clear from the facts that there were really no sales by the assessee to its members. We shall consider these aspects. Before doing so, we have to refer to certain facts and certain agreements.2. The Madras Motor Parts Dealers' Association is an association of its constituents who are all dealers in motor parts. The m...
R. Singaravelu Vs. Govindasami Chettiar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-06-1977
Reported in: (1978)1MLJ276
V. Balasubrahmanyan, J.1. This second appeal raises a nice point about rights of subrogation which a tenant of a building may claim against his landlord while seeking reimbursement through a Court of law of the municipal property tax which he has paid as occupier of that building. The question turns on a true construction of the relevant provisions of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and the Madras District Municipalities Act, 1920.2. The tenant in this case was in occupation of a certain non-residential building within the municipal limits of Kumbakonam Town. He had been paying the municipal property tax on the building for some time. So far as the agreement of lease between him and his landlord was concerned, the liability for the rates had to be borne wholly by the landlord. Nevertheless the tenant was meeting the half-yearly demands from the Municipality for the property tax only in virtue of his statutory liability as occupier of the building. Upto a certain time, such payments...
G. Shanmugham Chetty and anr. Vs. Chinnammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-06-1977
Reported in: (1978)1MLJ405
T. Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of Mohan, J., who on an application filed by the respondent in this appeal revoked the probate granted in favour of the appellant by Paul, J. This order is dated 14th February, 1974 whereunder he granted letters of administration to the will of one Alagiriswami Chetty. The respondent applicant has briefly stated in the affidavit in support of the Judge's summons for revocation as follows:2. She was admittedly a person to whom notice was ordered before the grant was made. But according to the respondent such a notice which was served on her on 12th January, 1974 was not accompanied by the copy of the petition filed for the grant and that no publication was made about the date of hearing of the testamentary proceedings and that she sought for inspection of the records as per order of the Master of this Court dated 19th March, 1974 and it was only thereafter she entered caveat. But as by then the letters of administration was...
State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Madras Motor Parts Dealers Association.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-06-1977
Reported in: (1978)7CTR(Mad)192
ORDERP. Govindan Nair, C.J. - These revisions are taken by the Revenue against the order of the Tribunal holding that the turnover of Rs. 2,07,878.77P. representing the alleged sales affected by the Madras Motor Parts Dealers Association to its members are not taxable and they are really and in law sales in the course of import. The short question is whether the said turnover for the year 1971-72 is taxable under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. While the Revenue contends that the turnover represented local sales coming under that head, on behalf of the assessee, it was contended on behalf of the assessee that those sales were in the course of import and that if that contention is not accepted, it is clear from the facts that there were really no sales by the assessee to its members. We shall consider these aspects. Before doing so, we have to refer to certain facts and certain agreements.2. The Madras Motor Parts Dealers Association is an Association of its constituents who are a...
Controller of Estate Duty, Madras Vs. Estate of Late R. Krishnamachari ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-05-1977
Reported in: [1978]113ITR200(Mad)
GOVINDAN NAIR C.J. - The question that has been referred to this court at the instance of the revenue by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench, reads as follows :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the exemption provided in section 33(1)(n) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, should be allowed in respect of the dwelling house of the Hindu undivided family from the value of the joint family properties before determining the share of the deceased and also that of the lineal descendants, the former for assessment and the latter for aggregation ?'A member of the Hindu undivided family governed by the Mitakshara law died. The only other members of the family were his only son and the deceased widow. The total estimated value of the properties, arrived at by applying the principle in section 36 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, is Rs. 2 lakhs. The correctness of this finding has not been canvassed and does not from the...
V.K. Abraham Vs. N.K. Abraham
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-04-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Mad56
1. The defendant in O. S. No. 91 of 19VO in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Padmanabhapuram, is the appellant. The plaintiff is a rubber dealer in Kulasekharam. The defendant is the owner of a rubber estate called the Cross Field Plantation at Kaliel. From the year 1963 the defendant was supplying sheet rubber as well as scrap rubber to the plaintiff from time to time. The plaintiff was also supplying estate stores and other materials. There were in addition cash transactions between the parties. The last of the dealings between the plaintiff and the defendant was on 23rd July 1966. The defendant did not thereafter supply any rubber. The account of the defendant stood at a debit of, or overdrawn on that date by a sum of Rs. 46,505.67. The plaintiff filed the present suit for reco., very of this sum along with interest at 12 per cent per annum, after giving credit for a sum of Rs. 8,494.20 being the amount due to the defendant's father M. K. Kuriakose on account of the price of scra...
K.A. Natarajan Vs. M. Naina Mohamed and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-03-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Mad280
1. In respect of a new route from Paramakudi to Madurai covering a distance of 49 miles, applications were called for under Section 57(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act and there were 35 applicants for the said route. After consideration of the various applications, the R. T. A. granted the permit to the first respondent herein, on 23-11-1966. An appeal to the State Transport Appellate Tribunal having failed, the matter was taken to this court by way of a writ petition. The writ petition was allowed and the grant in favour of the first respondent was set aside. However, in writ appeal the order of the State Transport Appellate tribunal was restored. Subsequently, the matter wag taken to the Supreme Court in C. A. No. 98 of 1975 and the Supreme Court has remitted the matter for fresh consideration by the Tribunal, by order dated 23-7-1975. By that time there was a draft scheme notified under Section 68-C of the Act on 4-6-1976, for the identical route and ...
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. N. Balaji
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-03-1977
Reported in: [1979]116ITR534(Mad)
P. Govindan Nair, C.J.1. This is a reference at the instance of the CED, Madras, in relation to the estate duty payable on the death of one Narayana Chettiar, who died on April 6, 1963. Between the years 1957 and 1960, commencing from May 26, 1957, the deceased had gifted properties worth Rs. 70,000 on May 26, 1957, and April 12, 1960, to Balaji, another sum of Rs. 70,000 on May 26, 1957, and April 12, 1960, to Govinda, a sum of Rs. 25,000 to Anusuya on April 6, 1958, and on the same day another sum of Rs. 25,000 to Saroja. Balaji, Govinda, Anusuya and Saroja are the children of the deceased. The deceased then borrowed from Balaji on March 3, 1960, Rs. 65,000, from Govinda another sum of Rs. 65,000 on the same day and from Anusuya and Saroja Rs. 25,000 each on the same date. So at the time of his death there were liabilities to the extent of Rs. 1,80,000. The creditors to whom the deceased owed these monies transferred their right to collect them to a firm called Balaji No. 2 on Februa...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »