Skip to content

Chennai Court July 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.

Jul 16 1980

K.R. Sivagami, Proprietor, Rajendran Tourist Vs. Mahaboob Nisa Bi and ...

Court: Chennai

Decided on: Jul-16-1980

Reported in: (1981)1MLJ375

ORDERG. Ramanujam, J.1. As these two appeals arise out of the same award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Cuddalore in the same claim petition arising out of an accident they are dealt with together.2. On 6th May, 1974, at about 4-30 A.M. an Ambassador tourist taxi, bearing registration No. M. S. L. 8304 belonging to the appellant in C. M. A No. 247 of 1977 and insured with the appellant in C. M. A. No. 367 of 1977, dashed against a stationary lorry near Ulundurpet railway gate. The said accident resulted in the death of three persons and injury to four persons who travelled in the taxi. On the basis that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the taxi by its driver, the claim petitions had been filed by the dependants of the deceased as also the insured before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal.3. One of the persons who died in the accident, is one Abdul Rahman. His widow and two minor sons had claimed a sum of Rs. 1,00,000, as compensation in C.P.No....


Jul 15 1980

M. Palaniappan Vs. A. Amsaveni Ammal and ors.

Court: Chennai

Decided on: Jul-15-1980

Reported in: (1981)1MLJ167

ORDERV. Ratnam, J.1. The first defendant in O.S. No. 572 of 1979, Sub-Court, Coimbatore, is the appellant in this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, which is directed against the order of the Court below dismissing an application filed by the appellant under Section 34 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940(hereinafter referred to as the Act) praying for a stay of the suit. The respondents herein instituted that suit for dissolution of the partnership firm M/s. Balasubramania Foundry in which the appellant, the respondents and others are partners and for other consequential reliefs. The partnership came into existence under the terms of the agreement dated 25th November, 1971. Inter alia, Clause 14 of the agreement provided that 'all disputes and questions in connection with the partnership or this deed, arising between the partners or between any one of them and their legal representatives and whether during or after the cessation of the partnership shall be referred to arbitration under the In...


Jul 11 1980

Kathira Match Factory and ors. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu

Court: Chennai

Decided on: Jul-11-1980

Reported in: [1981]48STC69(Mad)

Varadarajan, J.1. These appeals have been filed by the defendants in O.S. Nos. 28, 29, 31, 39, 37, 34, 30, 27, 32, 33, 35 and 41 of 1976 on the file of the Sub Court, Tuticorin, against the judgments and decrees passed in those suits, decreeing the suits as prayed for with costs. 2. The State of Tamil Nadu, represented by the Commercial Tax Officer, Tuticorin, filed the above suits for recovery of sales tax amounts refunded to the defendants as per the orders of the High Court. The defendants are the manufacturers of and dealers in safety matches. They sold matches during the years 1957-58 to 1965-66 in the course of inter-State trade and commerce. Sales tax under the Central Sales Tax Act (74 of 1956) was levied on those inter State sales. The defendants filed writ petitions in the High Court, as detailed below, questioning the levy. Defendants in Writ Petitions Nos. Years for which tax was levied O.S. No. 28 of 1976 2602 to 2610 of 1967 1957-58 to 1965-66 O.S. No. 29 of 1976 2798 to...


Jul 09 1980

R. Eucharista Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and ors.

Court: Chennai

Decided on: Jul-09-1980

Reported in: (1980)IILLJ363Mad

ORDER1. The petitioner first entered services in the Industries and Commerce Department as a lower division clerk on 20th June, 1955, In 1956 she became a probationer in the same department. With effect from 18-12-1958 she was promoted as an Assistant. Her service were then regularised with effect from 1-9-198O and her rank in the seniority list was fixed at No. 381. She, therefore, made representation to the Government requesting that her services should be regularised with effect from 19-12-1958 and her rank in the seniority should be suitably modified. 2. In or about 1965, the Tamil Nadu Small Industries Corporation (hereinafter called the Corporation) was incorporated to take over the control of the various small scale units under the Industries Department and the entire staff working in the different units were transferred en masse on deputation basis to the Corporation. As a result the petitioner also became an Assistant in the Corporation. While so, the Corporation was consideri...


Jul 09 1980

Official Assignee, Madras Vs. Inspector-general of Registration, Banga ...

Court: Chennai

Decided on: Jul-09-1980

Reported in: AIR1981Mad54

ORDER1. Messrs Della Technical Service represented by its partners were adjudicated insolvents on its own petition by the order of this Court dated 8-7-1977. Consequent on the vesting of the property in the Official Assignee, the factory building and land belonging' to the insolvent and situate at Kumberahalli, Kasba Hubli, Kolar taluk bear S. N. 33/1, measuring about 2 acres and 11 guntas were sold in public auction by the official Assignee. The 2nd respondent herein, M/s. Usha Telehoist Ltd., was the highest bidder in a sum of Rupees 1,70,000/-. Hence the sale was confirmed in favour of the 2nd respondent. Accordingly, the Official Assignee executed a sale deed in favour of the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent presented the sale deed for registration before the Sub-Registrar, Kolar in Karnataka State. The Sub-Registrar, Kolar, refused to register die same on the ground that no stamp duty had been paid on the sale deed. The Sub-Registrar, Kolar, took the view that the registration o...


Jul 09 1980

M.O.H. Aslum and anr. Vs. M.O.H. Uduman and Two ors.

Court: Chennai

Decided on: Jul-09-1980

Reported in: (1981)1MLJ67

G. Ramanujam, J.1. The civil miscellaneous appeal is directed against the order of the First Additional Subordinate Judge, Pondicherry in I.A. No. 1554 of 1979 in O.S. No. 287 of 1978 appointing an Advocate Receiver to take charge of a business carried on in the name and style of S.S. Agencies, pending the suit O.S. No. 287 of 1978 on his file.2. The circumstances under which the impugned order had been passed may be briefly stated. The respondents herein filed the said suit O.S. No. 287 of 1978 on the file of the Sub-Court, Pondicherry, for a declaration that the business which is carried on by defendants 1 and 2 in the name of S. S. Agencies belongs to the partnership of M/s. Hassan Kuthus Maricar consisting of the plaintiffs and the first defendant and for other reliefs which included the relief of 'committing the business of S.S. Agencies to the custody of an Advocate-Receiver'. The plaintiffs and the 1st defendant in the suit are admittedly brothers and they are said to have carri...


Jul 07 1980

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. K.P.V. Shaik Mohamed Rowther and Compan ...

Court: Chennai

Decided on: Jul-07-1980

Reported in: [1984]145ITR37(Mad)

Balasubrahmanyan, J.1. This is a case stated under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961, by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, on a direction issued by this court in that regard at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras.2. The question of law referred to us by the Tribunal in which we have made a textual correction of an obvious mistake is as follows:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the expenditure of Rs. 20,364 could not be described as an expenditure in the nature of 'entertainment expenditure within the meaning of Section 37(2A) ?'3. The reference arises in the assessment to income-tax of Messrs. K. P. V, Shaik Mohamed Rowther Company, Madras. This concern is a firm of eight partners carrying on business as agents of shipping companies and victualling contractors. Their main business is said to involve the canvassing of cargo and passengers for oceangoing ships. In their assessment for 1969-70...


Jul 04 1980

Manickam Alias Manickavasagam and ors. Vs. Ramaswamy Gounder and anr.

Court: Chennai

Decided on: Jul-04-1980

Reported in: (1981)1MLJ163

S. Natarajan, J.1. Defendants 1 to 9, 11 to 15, 17 to 25, 27 to 35 and 38 to 40, in the trial Court, respondents 41 to 43(legal representatives of the deceased 10th respondent) and respondents 44 and 45(legal representatives of the 16th respondent) in the lower appellate Court are the appellants. The plaintiff (first respondent herein) filed this suit, O.S. No. 978 of 1971 on the file of the Court of the District Munsif, Dindigul, for declaration of title and injunction in respect of the plaint A Schedule properties, failing which, for partition of his one-eighth share in the total extent of properties comprised in plaint Schedules A and B and for equitable allotment of the A Schedule portion to him. The District Munsiff declined to grant the first of the prayers and held that the plaintiff was entitled only to a decree for partition, but even there, he was not entitled to equities in his favour in the matter of the allotment of the A Schedule portion to him. Not satisfied with the dec...


Jul 03 1980

The Government of Tamil Nadu Vs. S.S.M. Soundi Chetti and anr.

Court: Chennai

Decided on: Jul-03-1980

Reported in: AIR1981Mad179

Ismail, C.J. 1. This is an appeal against the order of Varadarajan, J. dated 16th October 1979 allowing W.P. No, 2513 of 1977, and directing the Panchayat, the second respondent herein, to refund the excess water tax collected from the first respondent herein. The matter lies within a very narrow compass. Under Section 26(1) of the Tamil Nadu Public Health Act, 1939, any local authority, may, with the previous sanction of the Government, levy within its area or any part thereof, any tax which may be necessary for providing water supply in such area or part. Under subsection (3) (a) of the same section, the rates at which any tax may be levied under the section shall be determined by the local authority with the previous sanction of the Government, in case the tax is levied by the local authority of its own motion, and by the Government in case the tax is levied at their direction. In this particular case by G. O. Ms. No. 766 Health dated 21st March, 1962, the Government of Tamil Nadu a...


Jul 02 1980

Moolchand JaIn Vs. Assistant Collector of Customs

Court: Chennai

Decided on: Jul-02-1980

Reported in: 1980CENCUS641D

ORDERM.A. Sattar Sayeed, J.1. This petition coming on for hearing on Friday the 27th day of June 1980 and this day upon perusing the petition, and the Judgment of the Lower Courts, and the record in the case, and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. K A. Panchapakesan advocate for the petitioner, and of Mr. Elias Ali the Central Government Prosecutor on behalf of the respondent the court made the following order:1. The petitioner who was convicted and sentenced under Section 135(1)(b)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962, by the Courts below has filed the above criminal revision.2. It appears from the facts of the case that on 23-4-74 at about 10.30 a.m. P.W. 1 one of the preventive officers, along with other officers were keeping a watch over Messrs. Deluxe Roadlines, situate at No. 107, Govindappa Naicken Street, Madras-1. P.W. 1 noticing the petitioner coming to the godown at 10.30 a.m. on the aforesaid day and taking delivery of eight wooden cases from Messrs. Deluxe Roadlines, intercepted th...


  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial