Chennai Court March 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.
M.S. Sivakozhundu Mudaliar Vs. Amaravathi Finance Corporation
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-07-1980
Reported in: AIR1980Mad230
ORDER1. A registered partnership firm by name Amaravathi Finance Corporation, Karur, obtained a money, decree, and proceeded to execute it against the judgment debtor. The latter then moved the execution court for stay of execution under Tamil Nadu Ordinance No. 5 of 1978, called the, Tamil Nadu Debt Relief Ordinance, 1978. The execution court, however, rejected the application on the ground that the relief under the Ordinance was -not available to a debtor whose creditor was a partnership firm. The court said that while a partnership firm was not a person in the eye of the law, Ordinance No. 5 of 1978 had defined a creditor only in terms of his being a person. 2. This conclusion is challenged in this civil revision petition filed by the judgment debtor. I uphold this contention as well founded on more than one ground. 3. Section 2(1) of Ordinance No. 5 of 1978 defines the term 'creditor' as under ''Creditor' means a person from or in respect of whom the debtor has borrowed or incurred...
S. Perumal Reddiar Vs. Bank of Baroda and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-07-1980
Reported in: AIR1981Mad180
1. This is an appeal by the third defendant S. Perumal Reddiar against the judgment and decree dated 14th February, 1975, in 0. S. No. 99 of 1973 on the file of the Court of the learned Subordinate Judge, Kancheepuram, decreeing the suit with costs as prayed for. The trial court held that the 2nd defendant will be proceeded against after the remedies are exhausted against the first defendant. 2. The suit is on a promissory note. 3. The case of the plaintiff, Bank of Baroda by its power of attorney agent Kaliprasad Thakur, before the trial Court is that the plaintiff is a banking institution constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1969, with its branch, among other places at Mangadu and that the suit is instituted by the power of attorney agent Kali Prasad Thakur, the Regional Manager, Southern Region, Mount Road, Madras-2. The 1st defendant K. L. Sundaram Reddiar, the 2nd defendant A. Sundaram Reddiar and the 3rd defendant S. Ferumal Redd...
Tikamchand Mithalal JaIn Vs. M.R. Narasimhachari
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-07-1980
Reported in: AIR1981Mad21; (1980)1MLJ523
ORDER1. This is a revision petition preferred under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the order of eviction passed against the Petitioner by the Rent Controller, Madurai in R. C. O. P. 569 of 1975 on the file of his court and confirmed by the Appellate Authority (Principal Sub Judge, Madurai) in C. M. A. 146 of 1977 on the file of his court.2. The respondent, who is the landlord, leased out the petition premises some years ago on a monthly rent of Rupees 485/-, The demised premises comprises a portion of the ground floor, wherein the petitioner is having his business and the entire first floor, wherein the petitioner is residing with his family. The respondent sought the eviction of the petitioner from the demised premises under Section 10(3)(a)(i) of the Act, on the ground that one of his sons, by name, Radhakrishnan, who in a practicing advocate at Madurai, has married a lady doctor and they are, bona fide...
Tikkamchand Mithalal JaIn Vs. M.R. Narasimhachari
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-07-1980
Reported in: (1980)1MLJ522
S. Natarajan, J.1. This is a revision petition preferred under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), against the order of eviction passed against the petitioner by the Rent Controller, Madurai, in 'R.C.O.P. No, 569 of 1975 on the file of his Court and confirmed by the Appellate Authority (Principal Sub-Judge, Madurai) in C.M.A. No. 146 of 1977 on the file of his Court.2. The Respondent, who is the landlord, leased out the petition-premises some years ago on a monthly rent of Rs. 485. The demised premises comprises a portion of the ground floor, wherein the petitioner is having his business! and the entire first floor, wherein the petitioner in residing with his family. The respondent sought the eviction of the petitioner from the demised premises under Section 10(3)(a)(i) of the Act on the ground that one of his sons, by name Radhakrishnan, who is a practising Advocate at Madurai, has married a lady Doctor and they ...
S. Perumal Reddiar Vs. Bank of Baroda by Its Power of Attorney Kalipra ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-07-1980
Reported in: (1981)1MLJ419
S. Swamikkannu, J.1. This is an appeal by the third defendant S. Perumal Reddiar against the judgment and decree, dated 14th February, 1973, in O. S. No. 99 of 1973 on the file of the Court of the learned Subordinate Judge, Kancheepuram, decreeing the suit with costs as prayed for. The trial Court held that the 2nd defendant will be proceeded against after the remedies are exhausted against the first defendant.2. The suit is on a promissory note. The case of the plaintiff, Bank of Baroda by its power of attorney agent Kaliprasad Thakur, before the trial Court is that the plaintiff is a banking institution constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1969, with its branch, among other places at Mangadu and that the suit is instituted by the power of attorney agent Kaliprasad Thakur, the Regional Manager, Southern Region, Mount Road, Madras-2. The 1st defendant K.A. Sundaram Reddiar, the 2nd defendant A. Sundaram Reddiar and the 3rd defendant S....
Commissioner of Income-tax, Tamil Nadu Vs. Coromandel Steels Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-1980
Reported in: (1980)19CTR(Mad)227; [1981]130ITR856(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. In this reference under s. 256(1) of the I. T. Act, 1961, the following question has been referred : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, it has been rightly held that the unabsorbed development rebate of Rs. 1,98,603 relating to the assessment years 1962-63 to 1967-68 should be set off first against the income for the assessment years 1970-71 and 1971-72, and then only the business loss relating to the assessment years 1968-69 and 1969-70 ?' 2. The assessee, carrying on business in structural engineering, was assessed for the assessment years 1970-71 and 1971-72. For the earlier assessment years, it had carried forward business losses, unabsorbed depreciation and unabsorbed development rebate as follows : -------------------------------------------------------------------Assessment Business loss Unabsorbed Unabsorbedyears determined and depreciation developmentcarried forward rebate---------------------------------------------------------------...
K. Palanikumar Vs. Indian Bank and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-1980
Reported in: (1980)ILLJ414Mad
ORDER1. The facts leading to the writ petition are as follows : The petitioner passed B. Com, examination in the year 1977 held by the Madras University. He belongs to the Scheduled caste. An advertisement appeared sometime in December, 1977 in the Hindu calling for applications from candidates for appointment as clerk/shroff under the first respondent-Indian Bank. The petitioner filed his application. It requires to be stated at this stage that the advertisement indicated the nature of particulars which the candidate was required to furnish. Under column (h) the candidate was required to furnish the names of relatives, if any, working in Indian Bank and the nature of relationship together with the name of the Branch where they work. Admittedly the petitioner's step-brother was working in the Bank in its Bombay Fort Branch. Thinking that this column related only to parents and, therefore, he need not give the particulars required in his application dated 21-1-1978 that column was left ...
United India Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors. Vs. A.A. Nat ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-05-1980
Reported in: (1980)ILLJ369Mad
1. This is an appeal against the judgment of Ramanujam, J., dated 3rd February. 1978, allowing W.P. No. 5889 of 1978 preferred by the first respondent herein. The first respondent herein was originally appointed by the Union Co-operative Insurance Society Limited by an order dated 2-1-1963 as a Probationary Field Officer. The said order of appointment provided that his services might be deemed to be terminated at any time by giving one month's notice on either side. Subsequently he was confirmed as a Field Officer by an office order dated 29-9-1963 with effect from 1-9-1963. He was then promoted as a Development Officer and later as Development Secretary. Later by an order dated 19-2-1970 the first respondent was promoted as Development Manager of the Madras Regional Office with effect from 1-2-70. While he was functioning as Development Manager, a Custodian was appointed for the Union Co-operative Insurance Society Limited, under the General Insurance (Emergency Provisions) Act, 17 of...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras (Central) Vs. N.D. Georgopoules
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-04-1980
Reported in: (1980)19CTR(Mad)224; [1980]125ITR630(Mad)
Ramanujam, J. 1. At the instance of the revenue, the following two questions have been referred to us for our decision under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act: '(1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee had been assessed by way of regular assessment for the assessment year 1965.66 on February 15, 1966 (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the charge of interest under section 217 in the original assessment could be cancelled by rectification under section 154 ?' 2. The assessee in this case is carrying on business in hides and skins. For the assessment years 1967-68 and 1968-69, the ITO completed the assessment on March 29, 1972, and while doing so he charged interest under s. 217 of the I.T. Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act, amounting to Rs. 52,110 for 1967-68 and Rs. 57,938 for the year 1968-69 on the ground that the assessee should have filed an estimate of advance tax under s. 212(3) but had failed to do so. 3. On November 9, 197...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Tamil Nadu-iii Vs. C. Jayalakshmi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-04-1980
Reported in: (1980)18CTR(Mad)37; [1981]132ITR82(Mad)
1. Under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench 'A', at the instance of the commissioner of Income-tax, Tamil Nadu-III, Madras, has referred to this court, for its opinion, the following two questions :"1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the meaning of the term 'mainly' includes property partly occupied for residence and that it qualified for exemption under section 54 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that 50% of the capital gains should be exempt in terms of section 54 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?"2. The facts are not in controversy. The house property, door No. 3F, Gandhi Nagar, Adyar, Madras, comprises of the ground floor and the first floor. The ground floor was used for the purpose of the residence of the assessee's mother, and the first floor was ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »