Chennai Court September 1979 Judgments
The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Madras Vs. K.S. Dwarakanathan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-28-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Mad171
1. This reference by the Chief Controlling Revenue 'Authority, Board of Revenue, Mad under Sec. 57 of the Indian Stamp Act, IBM, arises under the following circumstances: The petitioner is the Chief Controlling Revenue. Authority, and the respondent is one K. S. Dwarakanathan. The respondent obtained an assignment of a decree from one Thirumathi G. Rathnavalli an 17-11-1977. The decree itself was passed in an original suit,O.S. 7230 of 1972, on the file of the City Civil Court, Madras. That decree was in favour of G. Rathnavalli, under which the defendant in that suit was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 12,853 with further interest as specified therein and the said deposit was to be made by 19-6-1976. It is this decree which Rathnavalli had obtained which was assigned in favour of the respondent in these Proceedings by document No. P. .312/77 dated. 16-11-1971 registered in the books of the joint Sub Registration I Saidapet, Madras. The said deed was engrossed on non-judicial stamp paper ...
Tag this Judgment!Sakthi Sugars Limited Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-28-1979
Reported in: 1980CENCUS505D; 1983(12)ELT484(Mad)
Varadarajan, J.1. These writ petitions have been filed by some manufacturers of sugar under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. W.P. No. 436 of 1977 has been filed by Messrs Sakthi Sugars Ltd, Coimbatore, for the issue of a writ of certiorified Mandamus calling for the records of the second respondent, the Superintendent of Central Excise, Bhovani, relating to his order dated 8-6-1976 in O.C. No. 2124 of 1976 in relation to the grant of excise duty rebate under the Government of India's notification dated 12-10-1974, for the sugar year 1974-75, and quashing that order and directing the second respondent and the first respondent, the Union of India, represented by the Collector of Central Excise, Madras, to give credit to a sum of Rs . 20,64,531-23 in the petitioner's account P.L.A. No. 29 (Sugar).2. W.P. No. 550 of 1977 is by Messrs Aruna Sugars Ltd, Pennadar, South Arcot district, for the issue of a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order calling for the records ...
Tag this Judgment!N. Ramanujam Naidu Vs. C. Panchanatha Mudaliar and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-28-1979
Reported in: (1980)1MLJ232
ORDERV. Ramaswami, J.1. The first respondent in the landlord of certain properties. He leased out the same in favour of a firm of partnership of which the petitioner was one of the two partners and the other was one Muthu Pillai. The landlord filed R.C.O.P, No. 90 of 1974 for eviction against both the petitioner herein and the said Muthu Pillai on the ground of wilful default in payment of rent. The learned Rent Controller ordered eviction finding wilful default in payment of the rent. The petitioner and the deceased Muthu Pillai filed C.M.A. No. 22 of 1975 against the order of eviction. The appeal was dismissed on 31st July. 1976. There is no evidence to show when C.R.P. No. 2197 of 1976 was filed against the order in the appeal. At the cause title showed the petitioner herein and the said Muthu Pillai as petitioners. During the pendency of the Civil Revision Petition in this Court, Muthu Pillai died on 5th September, 1976. But his legal representatives were not brought on record and ...
Tag this Judgment!Periathambi Goundan Vs. the District Revenue Officer, Coimbatore and o ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-27-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Mad180
1. This petition has been filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction calling for the records in B. P. No. 7 of 1975, on the file of the first respondent herein, namely, the District Revenue Officer, Coimbatore, and quash the order dated 22-11-75. One of the questions involved in this writ petition is the scope and effect of S. 16-A of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Land Record of Tenancy Rights Act, 1960 (Tamilnadu Act X of 1960) hereinafter referred to as the Act; introduced by the Tamilnadu Agricultural Land Record of Tenancy Rights (Amendment) Act 1972 (Tamil Nadu Act 84 of 1972) with effect from 27-11-1972.2. When the writ petition came up for hearing before our learned brother, Mohan J., the learned Judge held that two important questions of law came up for consideration, apart from the merits of the case, namely(1) "What is the scope and extent of the revenue authority constituted ...
Tag this Judgment!S. Rathinammal Vs. Ayyavu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-27-1979
Reported in: (1980)1MLJ296
T. Sathiadev, J.1. This Revision is filed against an order made by the Appellate Authority under Act XVIII of 1960(here in after referred to as 'the Act'), dismissing the petition to direct the deposit of the monthly rents during the pendency of G.M.A No. 28 of 1978 filed before it by the tenant. The Court below had relied upon a decision of this Court in Abdul Azeez Khan v. Appachi Gounder : (1957)2MLJ513 to hold that, when there is a denial of title of the landlord, there could be no direction for depositing the arrears of rent and the monthly rent till it is finally decided that there is the relationship of landlord and tenant or not.2. Landlord filed an application under Sections 10(2)(i) and 10(3)(ii) and 11(4) of the Act for eviction of the tenant-respondent herein on the ground that he had committed wilful default for the period from 1st June, 1965 onwards till the date of petition. In the petition, she had claimed that the tenant had taken up the premises for the purpose of con...
Tag this Judgment!V.T. Arunachalam Vs. the Commissioner, H.R. and C.E., Administrative D ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-27-1979
Reported in: (1980)1MLJ405
V. Sethuraman, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the third plaintiff in O.S. No. 58 of 1969 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Vellore. The suit was filed for setting aside the order made by the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments, who is the first defendant in the suit. The plaintiffs, who are four in number, of whom the first plaintiff is now no more, are the periathanakars of Vallam Village. They claimed to be the hereditary trustees of Dharmaraja and Mangi Amman Temples, situated in the village on the basis that the forefathers were trustees in succession. There was an earlier suit in O.S. No. 375 of 1935 in the Court of the District Munsif, Vellore, in which Thanji Gundar, the father of the third plaintiff, was the plaintiff and in which he asked for his recognition as a hereditary trustee of the temple. The hereditory trusteeship was recognised. The said judgment was said to have been affirmed by the District Court and the second appeal filed in the Hig...
Tag this Judgment!Soundarammal Vs. Sundara Mahalinga, Nadar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-26-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Mad294; (1980)2MLJ121
1. This appeal is preferred against C. M. A. No. 69 of 1975 on the file of the District judge, Tirunelveli who disagreed with the order of dismissal made by the Subordinate judge, Tirunelveli in O. P. 62 of 1972, which was a petition filed by the respondent hereto .under S. 13(I-A) of the Hindu Mar. nage Act 25 of 1955 . The appellant here in is the wife of the respondent2. It transpires that they were married on 17-7-1956 and they lived together tin W10-1961. It is claimed by the appellant herein, that, because of cruelty and several other factors, she was driven out of the house by the respondent herein. She also refers to the respondent living in adultery with another woman. O. P. 5 of 1962 was filed by the respondent for restitution of conjugal rights and it was ordered on 5-11-1962. Appellant filed O. P. 117 of 1963 for restitution of conjugal rights, but that petition was later on withdrawn. Appellant then filed O. P. 85 of 1,967 in the Sub-Court, Tuticorin under Ss. 10, 11, 24 a...
Tag this Judgment!Athiappa Asari Vs. Chinna Goundar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-25-1979
Reported in: (1980)2MLJ149
V. Balasubrahmanyan, J.1. This second appeal raises two questions arising under the execution chapter of the Civil Procedure Code. (i) construction and application of Order 21. Rule 57(1) : and (ii) construction of an order passed by an executing Court dismissing an execution petition under that rule on account of the default of the decree-bolder. These two questions have arisen as between the appellant and the first respondent. Both are court-auction purchasers of the self-same item of property belonging to the same individual. They purchased the property at different times, in execution of different decrees against the same judgment-debtor. As between the two Court auction-sales, than in which the appellant purchased the property was prior in point of time. Although this was so in fact, the first respondent asserted his title as a purchaser under the subsequent Court auction purchase, on the score that the earlier auction sale in the appellant's favour was void. Both the Courts below...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Ramaswami Mudaliar Kudumba Dharma Trust and Ramaswami Mudaliar Sam ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-24-1979
Reported in: [1983]139ITR990(Mad)
Varadarajan, J. 1. Writ Petition N0. 493 of 1977, has been filed by Ramaswami Mudaliar Kudumba Dharma Trust and Ramaswami Mudaliar Samaya Improvement Trust, Manjakollai Village, Nagapattinam Taluk, Thanjavur District, represented by S. Chidambaranatha Mudaliar, Trustee in charge, underArticle 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a writ of certiorari calling for the records of the second respondent, the Commissioner of Agrl I.T., Madras, dated November 8, 1976, made in Revision Petition No. 257 of 1976, confirming the order of the Agrl. ITO, Nagapattinam, the first respondent, dated March 30, in GIR Nos. 271 and 272-R in respect of the assessment years 1972-73 to 1974-75. Writ Petition No. 495 of 1977, has been filed by Ramaswami Mudaliar Samaya Improvement Trust, Manjakollai, Nagapattinam Taluk, Thanjavur District, represented by its trustee R. Sambandamurthi Mudaliar for the issue of a writ of certiorari calling for the records of the Commr. of Agrl. I.T., Madras, the sec...
Tag this Judgment!Lakshmi Opticals by Proprietor, E.N. Mohanasundaram Vs. N. Ramakrishna ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-20-1979
Reported in: (1980)1MLJ106
S. Ratnavel Pandian, J.1. This petition has been filed by the seven tenants (respondents in E.P. No. 847 of 1979) in H.R.C. No. 3274 of 1976 pending on the file of the VII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras, seeking transfer of the said execution proceedings to the file of the XI Assistant City Civil Judge, Madras, to be heard along with O.S.No. 5394 of 1979.2. The brief facts of the case which led to this transfer petition are as follows: One, M. Ramakrishnan as landlord filed the above H.R.C. No. 3274 of 1976 for eviction of 21 tenants inclusive of the seven petitioners herein from the shops occupied by them as tenants, on the ground of demolition and reconstruction, under Section 14(1)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The landlord and the tenants inclusive of the seven petitioners herein entered into an agreement on 18th January, 1979, under which the landlord agreed to demolish and reconstruct the shops, each ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »