Chennai Court November 1978 Judgments
Controller of Estate Duty, Madras Vs. Leelavathi Devi, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-21-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Mad177; [1979]117ITR97(Mad)
Ismail, J. 1. One Shri Govindram Shivaldas was carrying on a proprietary business. On 24-10-1965 he debited his capital account in the business with Rs. 15,000/- and opened an account in the name of his son Kailash and credited the said amount of Rs. 15,000/ to that account. The business was conducted as a proprietary concern till 8-11-1966. An amount of Rs. 1906/- was credited to the account of Kailash as interest. Thus, on 8-11-1966 the amount standing to the credit of Kailash in the books of the proprietary concern of Shri Govindram Shivaldas was Rs. 16,906/-. The proprietary concern of Shri Govindram Shivaldas was converted into a partnership concern with effect from 9-11-1966 by the son Kailash becoming a partner along with the father. The credit balance of Rs. 16,906/- in the account of Kailash was transferred to the books of the firm and was credited in the name of Kailash as his capital contribution to the business of the firm. The credit balance in the account of Kailash in th...
Tag this Judgment!The Peddanaickenpalayam Co-operative Agricultural Bank Ltd. Vs. Govern ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-21-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Mad241
1. This writ petition is filed by the President of the Peddanaickenpalayam Co-operative Agricultural Bank Ltd. After enumerating the various powers enjoyed by the Bank under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, reference is made to the fact that the management and administration of the third respondent (Salem Co-operative Central Bank), of whom the petitioner is one of the share-holder members, vests in the general body of its members, and that the general body is empowered to constitute a Committee for the purpose of entrusting the management of the affairs of the Society to such nominees of theirs. As the Society has been registered under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, it is body corporate with power to hold property and do all things necessary for the purpose for which it was constituted. Reference is made to the general powers vested under Chapter VIII of the Act, in the Government in and by which the Government is enabled to is...
Tag this Judgment!Thangammal and ors. Vs. K. Dhanalakshmi and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-20-1978
Reported in: AIR1981Mad254
ORDER1. This appeal involves an interesting question of law arising out of two inconsistent provisions6 one occurring in the Limitation Act and the other occurring in the Civil Procedure Code.IA. The appellants herein were the judgment debtors in 0. S. No. 244 of 1961. on the file of the Sub Court, Coimbatore. The decree in the said suit was put in execution in ILP.No. 281 of 1977 and the appellants' Properties had been sold in court auction on 21-11:977. for a sum of Rs. 45060. The appeltants came forward with a petition in E. A. No. 202 of 1978 on 24-1-1978 to set aside the sale on depositing the entire decree amount, commission and poundage under 0. 21, Rule 89, C. P. Code.2. The said application for setting aside the sale was opposed by the auction purchaser on the ground that the deposit had been made beyond 30 days from the date of the sale and. therefore. it was, not maintainable. The decree holder however did not file any counter opposing the application. The court below upheld...
Tag this Judgment!Jonas Woodhead and Sons (India) Ltd., Madras Vs. Commissioner of Incom ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-20-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Mad185; [1979]117ITR55(Mad)
1. At the instance of the assessee, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench 'B', Madras, has referred the following question for the opinion of this Court:--"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that 25% of the amount paid by the assessee as royalty to Messrs. Jonas Woodhead & Sons, was capital expenditure and therefore not allowable as a revenue expenditure under the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment years 1967-68 and 1968-69".2. The assessee is a limited company incorporated on 8-3-1963 to carry on the business of manufacturing automobile springs. The accounting year of the assessee company is the calendar year. On 8-4-1964, it entered into an agreement with Jonas Woodhead and Sons Ltd., having its registered Office in the United Kingdom, hereinafter referred to as the "English Company" for the manufacture of all types of springs and suspensions for road and rail vehicles as were being manufactu...
Tag this Judgment!Management of Coimbatore Pioneer B. Mills Vs. Presiding Officer, Labou ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-17-1978
Reported in: (1979)ILLJ41Mad
V. Ramaswami, J.1. The appellants in these two writ appeals are the Management of Coimbatore Pioneer B. Mills Ltd., Coimbatore. On the 19th of October, 1970 at 3 A.M. they put up in the notice board of the mill a notice stating that the management had decided to retrench 87 women reelers with effect from 19-10-1970 for the reasons explained in the annexure to that notice. After giving particulars of the total workers and the retrenched workers, the notice further stated that 'the workers concerned have been/will be paid compensation as required by and in accordance with Clause (b) of Section 25F of that Act' (The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947--hereinafter referred to as the Act). Among the reasons given for retrenchment, it is stated that the mills have decided to produce mainly fine counts and cone yarn to meet the demand of importers from other countries which has resulted in considerable reduction of reeled production rendering a large number of reelers idle, with about 75 to 100 wo...
Tag this Judgment!Cheran Transport Corporation Limited Vs. Addl. Commissioner for Workme ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-16-1978
Reported in: (1979)ILLJ233Mad
Natarajan, J.1. The interesting question falling for consideration in this petition is whether a motor transport worker as defined in Section 2(3)(h) of the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Central Act) is entitled to invoke the provisions of the Madras Shops and Establishments Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the State Act) and prefer an appeal under Section 41(2) of the State Act to the Additional Commissioner for Workman's Compensation against an order of dismissal passed against him by his employer. The petitioner, which is a motor transport undertaking, contends that such an appeal cannot be filed and Seeks a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or direction to quash the order of the first respondent herein holding that he is competent to hear the appeal preferred by the motor transport worker under Section 41(2) of the State Act.2. The second respondent herein was employed as a conductor in the transport undertaking of the petitioner....
Tag this Judgment!The Cheran Transport Corporation Ltd. Vs. the Additional Commissioner ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-16-1978
Reported in: (1979)2MLJ62
S. Natarajan, J.1. The interesting question falling for consideration in this petition is whether a motor transport worker as defined in Section 2(3)(h) of the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Central Act) is entitled to invoke the provisions of the Madras Shops and Establishment's Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the State Act) and prefer an appeal under Section 41(2) of the State Act to the Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation against an order of dismissal passed against' him by his employer. The petitioner which is a motor transport undertaking contends, that such an appeal cannot be filed and seeks a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or direction to quash the order of the first respondent herein holding that he is competent to hear the appeal preferred by the motor transport worker under Section 41 (2) of the State Act.2. The second respondent herein was employed as a conductor in the transport undertaking of the petiti...
Tag this Judgment!Madurai Coats Ltd. Vs. the Inspector of Factories and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-16-1978
Reported in: (1980)2MLJ62
Ramanujam, J.1. An interesting question that arises for consideration in this writ petition is whether an employer is bound to pay wages to his employees for national and festival holidays which fall within a period during which the employees were on strike. Koshal, J. (as he then was) has in an earlier case in Vasudevan, R.M.S. Union v. Lotus Mills Ltd. (1977) II L.L.J. 433 : (1978) L.I.C. 656 : 52 F.J.R. 127 : 36 Fac. L.R. 409, held that the employer cannot escape his obligation to pay wages to his workmen for national and festival holidays eves if those holidays occurred during a period when the workmen were on strike, When the said judgment was relied on by the respondent herein before Natarajan, J. when this case came up before him, the learned Judge was unable to share the view expressed by Koshal, J. and, therefore, referred the case to a Division Bench. That is how the matter has come before us.2. The facts of the case may be briefly set out. The petitioner is a well-known comp...
Tag this Judgment!P. Lachiram Vs. K.N. Kumaresan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-16-1978
Reported in: (1979)2MLJ135
T. Ramaprasada Rao, CJ.1. There is no error of jurisdiction in the order. Both the Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority went into the question in detail and found as to what was the amount payable by the tenant and after giving him sufficient opportunity to pay or to deposit the rent as determined (in this casein was not even disputed), the Rent Controller passed a final order directing the petitioner-tenant to put the landlord in possession of the building because of non-compliance. It is as against the concurrent findings of fact and the ultimate conclusions arrived at by the two Tribunals that the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed.2. A proceeding under Section 11(4) of the Act is intended to accelerate the long-drawn proceedings tinder the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act. As eviction is possible in a case where the tenant commits wilful default in the payment of rents and particularly, after the recent amendment in 1973 explaining wilful default...
Tag this Judgment!E.i.D. Parry (India) Ltd. Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-14-1978
Reported in: [1979]44STC352(Mad)
Balasubrahmanyan, J. 1. This revision petition under Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, is brought by E.I.D. Parry (India) Limited, Madras (hereinafter called the assessees), against an order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras.2. The assessees carry on business as distillers. They manufacture methylated spirit, denatured spirit and rectified spirit in their distilleries in the State and sell them to various persons and institutions. The different stages of manufacture and sale of these spirits are governed and regulated by the Rules framed by the State Government under the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937. The regulation of the trade, under the relevant Rules, takes the form of a net work of licensing procedures. The system of licences is also at the same time utilised by the Rules for the purpose of raising revenues for the State. Periodical licence fees on holders of licences are impositions of one kind. Levy of excise duties on spirits at one stage or...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »