Chennai Court January 1981 Judgments
Management of Craigmore Estate, Kullakamby Post, Nilgiris Dist. Vs. La ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-06-1981
Reported in: (1981)IILLJ23Mad
1. Certain disciplinary proceedings were taken by the petitioner against the second respondent which culminated in an order of dismissal against the second respondent. The second respondent agitated the mater further but way of industrial dispute which got referred to the Labour Court, Coimbatore in I.D. No. 87 of 1977. Before the Labour Court, the representative on behalf of the second respondent herein seemed to have argued only the question of punishment and it was submitted before the Labour Court that the punishment of dismissal is disproportionate to the nature of misconduct alleged against the second respondent. The question has been gone in to by the Labour Court and it found warrant and justification for interfering with the punishment and while ordering reinstatement of the second respondent with continuity of service, it declined back wages. 2. Before me, Mr. S. Jayaraman, learns counsel for the petitioner, submits that none of the consideration which have weighed with the l...
Tag this Judgment!Kani Ammal and ors. Vs. Tamil Nadu Wakf Board and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-06-1981
Reported in: AIR1983Mad188
Mohan, J.1. These two Letters Patent Appeals cane be dealt with under a common judgment. The facts leading to the Letters Patent Appeals may be traced briefly as follows : Three items of properties of which two form the subject-matter of these two appeals belonged originally to one Hamsa Mohideen Maraikayar. He executed a deed of wakf under the original of Ex. A-1 on 7th January, 1944, covering the three items of properties. The deed styles itself as wakf and under the said deed certain charities are directed to be performed, the details of which we would mention from the properties forming the subject-matter of the wakf deed. It is stated expressly in the deed that on and from the date of the execution of the document, the executant would be the muthavalli and he shall have no power of alienation and he will carry on the charities during his lifetime. It was further stated that after his lifetime, his son Naina Mohamad Bhuhari and his heirs will take the properties according to the la...
Tag this Judgment!Kani Ammal and ors. and Vs. Tamil Nadu State Wakf Board Represented by ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-06-1981
Reported in: (1982)2MLJ196
S. Mohan, J.1. These two Letters Patent Appeals can be dealt with under a common judgment. The facts leading to the Letters Patent appeals may be traced briefly as follows:Three items of properties of which two form the subject-matter of these two appeals belonged originally to one Hamsa Mohideen Maraikayar. He executed a deed of wakf under the original of Exhibit A-1 on 7th January, 1944 covering the three items of properties. The deed styles itself as wakf and under the said deed certain charities are directed to be performed, the details of which we would mention a little later, from out of the income from the properties forming the subject-matter of the wakf deed. It is stated expressly in the deed that on and from the date of the execution of the document, the executant would be the muthavalli and he shall have no power of alienation and he will carry on the charities during his lifetime. It was further stated that after his lifetime, his son Naina Mohamad Bhuhari and his heirs wi...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Nava Bharath Enterprises (P.) Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-1981
Reported in: [1983]52STC235(Mad)
Ismail C.J. 1. This is a petition to revise the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Main Bench), Madras, dated 8th January, 1980, made in T.A. No. 836 of 1979. The matter lies within a very narrow compass. The respondent herein was a registered dealer under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act and was paying regularly registration fee up to the assessment year 1973-74. From the assessment year 1974-75, the respondent did not remit the fee for renewal of the registration certificate. According to the respondent, there was no business in respondent-company until March, 1977, since the factory was closed down. In November, 1976, and March, 1977, the respondent claimed to have sold imported paraffin to various companies and collected sales tax. From the inspection by the Intelligence Wing Officers, these sales were brought to the notice of the department. Thereafter a notice was issued and objections were called for. While the matter was thus pending, on 2nd June, 1978, the responde...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›