Chennai Court October 1980 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.
R. Seshammal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-10-1980
Reported in: (1981)20CTR(Mad)328; [1981]130ITR81(Mad)
Padmanabhan, J.1. The petitioner, Seshammal, the widow of late Rathinaswamy Chettiar, has prayed for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to release 21,660 gms. of gold jewellery seized from her residence on September 3, 1972. 2. The facts of the case may be briefly set out as follows. The late Rathinaswamy Chettiar was carrying on business in gold and gold jewellery under the name and style of Sri Nataraja Vilas Jewellery Hall at Chidambaram. He died on November 7, 1971. Thereafter, the business was being carried on by his legal heirs. On September 3, 1972, the intelligence wing of the I. T. Dept. searched the residence and business premises of the petitioner. They seized about 21 kgs. of old and new gold jewellery and primary gold worth about Rs. 4,48,319. The ITO thereafter passed a summary order under s. 132(5) of the I. T Act. He determined the total income at Rs. 6,90,390 and the tax liability at Rs. 6,30,775. While so, on October 8, 1975, the President of In...
Sahaya Barathy Vs. Anthony Sahaya Rajaputhiraik
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-10-1980
Reported in: AIR1981Mad78
Ismail, C.J.1. This matter has come to this court under section 17 of the Indian divorce act, 1869. Before the learned district judge, coimbathore, in O. S. No 1 of 1979, the plaintiff who was the wife, had prayed for a decree of divorce. However the was presented under section 22 of the Act. It was alleged in the plaint that she was the third wife of the defendant who married her after the death of his second wife; the defendant had five issues through his second wife and they were under the care and custody of the defendant; the defendant was addicted to several bad habits like betting in horse race, gambling and drinking, he indulged in too much in these bad habits particularly after the birth of the son to the Plaintiff, her pleading with the defendant to give up his bad ways and attend to the needs of the family did not bear any fruit and the defendant was not only adamant in wasting his money and health over those bad habits but also began treating the plaintiff cruelly and bruta...
Abdul Hameed Vs. Eganathan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-10-1980
Reported in: AIR1981Mad137
1.This is a second appeal from the judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge, Karaikkal, dismissing A.S. 23 of 1974 preferred by the third defendant against the judgment and decree in 0, S. 6 of 1973, on the file of the Court of the District Munsif, Karaikkal. 2. The respondent herein, Eganathan, filed 0. S. 6 of 1973, for cancellation of the 'Act de Notoriete' D/- 19-6-1954 and for a declaration of his title to the suit property. The 3rd defendant claimed title to the suit property under a sale deed executed by the father of defendants 1 and 2. Defendants 1 and 2 who were the sons of the vendor under whom the third defendant claims title to the suit property, were absent and set ex parte. The suit was decreed with costs as prayed for by the learned District Munsif. 3. Against the judgment and decree of the learned District Munsif, Karaikkal, the 3rd defendant has filed A. S. No. 23 of 1974 on the file of the Sub Court, Karaikkal, without impleading defendants 1 and 2. The plaintiff is...
Sundaram Finance Ltd., Represented by Its Secretary and Chief Accounta ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-10-1980
Reported in: (1981)1MLJ301
ORDERS. Padmanabhan, J.1. The question that arises for cone sideration in this writ petition is whether the petitioner, M/s. Sundaram Finance Limited-Madras, is a 'shop' within the meaning of the Notification No. 1088, Labour and Employment dated 26th December, 1976(hereinafter referred to as the Notification). Mr. Devanathan strenuously contended that the word 'shop' would not take in establishments like M/s. Sundaram Finance Limited which are purely commercial establishments. The learned counsel drew my attention to the definition of the word 'shop' in the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act, 1947 which definition excludes commercial establishment from its ambit. He also referred to certain dictionaries as regards the meaning of the word 'shop'.2. In New India Maritime Agencies Private Limited, Madras v. The Government of Tamil Nadu and another W. P. No. 4077 of 1977. I have had occasion to consider the scope and width of the expression 'shop' as used in the Notification. In that...
State Vs. Rangaswami and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-1980
Reported in: 1981CriLJ694
ORDER1. This revision is by the State. The respondents herein are the accused in S.C. No. 129 of 1972 on the file of the Court of the Third Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Coimbatore. The Assistant Sessions Judge convicted the accused under Section 395 read with S. 397 Indian Penal Code and sentenced A-1 to A-3 to two years' rigorous imprisonment and sentenced A-4 to A-6 to one years' rigorous imprisonment. The accused preferred an appeal from jail and the appeal C.A. No. 90 of 1973 was disposed of by the Sessions Judge, Coimbatore (West) Division and the Lower Appellate Court has confirmed the conviction and sentences of the first Court. In the present revision by the State, it is urged that the accused having been found guilty under Section 395 read with S. 397 Indian Penal Code, the minimum sentence of seven years prescribed under S. 397 Indian Penal Code ought to have been imposed and this error should be corrected now in revision by enhancing the sentence to the minimum presc...
G.N. Venkataswamy Vs. Tamil Nadu Small Industries Development Corporat ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-07-1980
Reported in: AIR1981Mad318; (1981)2MLJ254
Ismail, C.J.This batch of writ petitions raises common questions regarding the validity of Section 52-A of the Tamil Nadu Revenue Recovery Act (I of 1864) as amended by the Tamil Nadu Act 12 of 1972, hereinafter referred to as the Act. The said Section 52-A reads as follows:-'52-A, Recovery of sumc due to the Tamil Nadu Agro-Industries Corporation and another. Corporations etc:- without prejudice to any other mode of recovery which is being taken or may be taken, all loans granted and all advances made to any person- (i) by the Tamil Nadu Agro Industries Corporation Limited. Madras or(ii) by such other Corporation (the shares of which have been contributed, underwritten or guaranteed by the State Government) as may be notified in this behalf by the State Government in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette, or(iii) from out of the Amalgamated Tamil Nadu Shares of the Post War Services Reconstruction Fund and the Special Fund for Reconstruction and Rehabilitation of Ex-servicemen, together w...
The Municipal Council, Represented by Its Special Officer Vs. Taj Prak ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-07-1980
Reported in: (1981)1MLJ197
S. Suryamurthy, J.1. These four appeals have been preferred by the Municipal Council, Tiruvarur, represented by its Special Officer, against the judgments and decrees of the learned Subordinate Judge, Nagapattinam, who dismissed A.S. Nos. 120, 121, 122 and 123 of 1975 as well as the cross-objections preferred against the judgments and decrees of the District Munsif, Tiruvarur, in O.S. Nos. 226, 255, 451 and 513 of 1973 on his file. The suits were instituted by different plaintiffs for a declaration that the general revision and the subsequent increase in tax on the plaintiffs' buildings is illegal and ultra vires and for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant-Municipality from realising any amount as per the demand notices and assessments. The taxes payable by the respective plaintiffs for the properties situate within the Municipal limits of Tiruvarur were revised and enhanced in the general revision of taxes payable for all the properties situate within the Municipal area a...
Arvinda Vs. Ravindra Singh and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-06-1980
Reported in: 1981CriLJ155
ORDER1. These two revisions are by P.W. 1 in C.C. No. 3917 of 1978 on the file of the Fourth Metropolitan Magistrate, Madras. The first respondent is the accused in the said case. The court below framed a charge under S. 326, I.P.C. and since the accused pleaded not guilty to the said charge, proceeded to take evidence on behalf of the prosecution. P.W. 1 was examined on the side of the prosecution. Before the other witnesses could be examined, the court below deemed fit to alter the change under Section 326, I.P.C. into one under S. 224, I.P.C. and the altered charge was read and explained to the accused. At this stage, the accused filed a petition voluntarily admitting the offence and on the basis of this petition, the court below found the accused guilty not only under S. 324, I.P.C., but also under S. 341, I.P.C. for which no charge was either initially framed or subsequently added. Taking into consideration certain factors pleaded by the accused, the court below sentenced him to p...
Varadalakshmi Mills Limited and Bhajraj Textiles Mills Ltd. Vs. the As ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-06-1980
Reported in: 1981LC265D(Madras)
ORDERMohan, J.1. These writ petitions coming on for hearing on this day upon perusing the petition and the respective affidavits filed in support thereof the order of the High Court, dated 17.3.78 and made herein, and the counter and reply affidavits filed herein and the records relating to the order in 1. Order No. 1967/77 dt. 18.5.77 and order No. 970/77 dt. 29.4.77; 2. Order dt. 2.9.76 in CV/18A/ 24-76 (Appeal No. 1585/76) and dt. 30.6.75. in CV/18A/14/74 (Appeal 118/75) 3. Order dt. 6.4.75 in C.No. V/I8A/30-2-75 and dt. 4.5.74 in C.No. V/I8A/30-5-8-73 respectively on the file of the respondents herein and comprised in the return of the said respondents 1 to 3 herein in both the petition to the writ made by the High Court, and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. K.K. Venugopal for M/s. M.N. Krishnamani, K.V. Sridharan and T.K. Rajeswaran Advocates for the petitioner in both the cases, and of Mr. K.N. Balasubramanian Additional Central Government standing Counsel on behalf of the respo...
L.M. Ven Moppes Diamond Tools India Ltd., Madras Vs. Government of Ind ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-03-1980
Reported in: 1981(8)ELT165(Mad)
1. The petitioner is a manufacturer of synthetic diamond tools and wheels. The petitioner's factory was originally at Madras and now at Conoor. They imported a consignment of synthetic diamond grits bearing parcel No. 12052/72 from the United Kingdom of the value of Pounds 2655.21 under Import Licence No. P/A/1335278/C/XX/42/M/33-34. It was cleared by the petitioner on payment of full duty on 25-5-1972. They use the synthetic diamond grits for the manufacture of grinding wheels. The synthetic diamond grits are subject to customs duty under the Indian Tariff Act (item 87). For this item the standard rate of duty payable was 60 per cent ad valorem. It appears there was a reduction of this rate later, but that is not material for our purpose. Under Notification No. 2, dated 1-1-1969, issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, synthetic abrasive grains or powder imported for the manufacture of grinding wheels or coated abrasives are exempt from the payment of customs duty levi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »