Chennai Court December 1981 Judgments
K.P. Ayyeemuthuswami Gounder Vs. the Land Commissioner, Board of Reven ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-1981
Reported in: (1982)1MLJ133
ORDERNainar Sundaram, J.1. The petitioner is the owner of the lands declared as surplus under the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act (LVIII of 1961), hereinafter 'refer-red to as the Act. AH the proceedings under the Act have been oompleted. The draft assessment roll under Section 50 (3) of the Act was published on 10th July, 1974 and the final assessment roll was also published on 2nd October, 1974. The amount payable for the lands acquired was determined at Rs. 6,916. The said amount has also been disbursed. The surplus lands have also been assigned to third parties and the value for the lands so assigned has also been determined on the basis of the determination of the amount payable for the lands acquired. While so, after the lapse of practically four years, the first respondent purported to exercise suo motu powers of revision under Section 82 of the Act in respect of the draft assessment roll and by the impugned order dated 30th November, 1978, came to the ...
Tag this Judgment!Sivagami Ammal and ors. Vs. P.S. Elango
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-1981
Reported in: (1982)1MLJ423
ORDERT.N. Singaravelu, J.1. The landladies are the revision petitioners who filed the petition for eviction in respect of a residential building on the ground of wilful default in payment of rent for the period from November, 1975 to September, 1976. The Rent Controller found that the tenant had committed wilful default in payment of rent and ordered eviction. During the pendency of the appeal, the tenant produced a carbon copy of the judgment in P.S. Elango v. Sivagarni Amtnal and two Ors. C.R.P. No. 1325 of 1977, dated 16th November, 1978, as additional evidence, wherein this Court in a revision petition arising out of an earlier petition for eviction observed that the tenant undertook to pay rent regularly in future and that the tenant should be given a last chance to reform himself and pay the rent regularly without default. Before this order was passed in C.R.P. No. 1325 of 1977, the landlord had already filed another petition for eviction which has given rise to this present civi...
Tag this Judgment!P. Sella Pillai Vs. L. Balaraman
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-1981
Reported in: (1982)2MLJ282
ORDERS. Mohan, J.1. The landlord is the revision petitioner before me. This revision petition arises out of the proceedings taken under the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (XVIII of 1960), hereinafter referred to as the Act, on the following allegations.2. The petitioner claims that the property belongs to him. The respondent became a tenant under him under Exhibit A-2, dated 10th July, 1969 agreeing to pay a monthly rent of Rs. 50 payable on 10th of every English calendar month, on default at Rs. 52 per month from the date of default. The rent was paid regularly till 23rd August, 1972, admittedly and thereafter he failed; to pay the rent and committed wilful default. This necessitated the landlord in preferring R.C.O.P. No. 36 of 1973. But the same was withdrawn, as there was a defect in the issuer of notice as required under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. It may be stated at this stage that the law was somewhat nebulous as regards the necessity of noti...
Tag this Judgment!C. Umapathy Vs. the Manager (Marketing), Tamilnadu Dairy Development C ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-1981
Reported in: (1984)ILLJ248Mad
ORDER1. The petitioner claimed that he was 'a person employed' within the meaning of the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act, 1947, herein after referred to as the Act, with the Tamil Nadu Dairy Development Corporation, hereinafter referred to as the Corporation, as a Sales Assistant. There was an inspection of the depot in which the petitioner was working on 15th December, 1975 and he was found absent, leaving the transactions of the depot in charge of an outsider. On this basis, the petitioner's services were terminated on 29th December, 1975. The petitioner approached the third respondent under S. 41(2) of the Act. The Corporation put forth two contentions before the third respondent. One is, the services of the petitioner were governed by a contract, marked in the case as Ex. R. 1. and hence he cannot be deemed to be a 'person employed' within the meaning of the Act and the provisions of the Act would not apply to his case. The second contention is that the petitioner was, admi...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Tamil Nadu Vs. the Tata Oil Mills Co. Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-1981
Reported in: [1983]52STC328a(Mad)
Balasubrahmanyan, J.1. The question in this case is whether prawns cleaned, cut, sized and packaged for export can be regarded as a different kind of commercial commodity from prawns which were caught fresh from the sea. A more or less similar point was raised in State of Tamil nadu represented by Additional Deputy Commissioner (C.T.), Madras Division, Madras v. Ceyvere Southern Inc. Kilpauk, Madras-10 (T.C. No. 1049 of 1980) [1983] 52 STC 328 in regard to lobsters which were subject to similar operations before sale. By judgment dated 11th February, 1981, this Court held that notwithstanding these operations, lobsters retained their original character as the same commercial commodity. By analogy of reasoning, we must hold in this case that prawns subjected to the processes of cleaning, cutting and the like are not any the less prawns and therefore they cannot be regarded as a new kind of commercial commodity. This was the decision rendered by the Tribunal in this case on this basis, i...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Tamil Nadu Vs. K. Alagesan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-1981
Reported in: [1983]52STC67(Mad)
Balasubrahmanyan, J. 1. In this case an assessment to sales tax was taken in appeal by the assessee. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner set aside the assessment and remanded the case to the assessing authority. Against the order of remand, the assessee filed a further appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal, while upholding the order of remand, however, made certain directions and suggestions in regard to the matter under remand observing on what lines the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order of remand has got to be worked out. The State feels aggrieved by these observations. They have brought this revision before us. 2. Under section 38 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, the Deputy Commissioner acting for the State Government may prefer a revision against an order passed by the Tribunal on the ground that the Tribunal has decided a question of law erroneously or has failed to decide a question of law which it has got to decide. In this case, the objection by the State G...
Tag this Judgment!Ragubathy Paul Roslan Vs. the Under Secretary, Education Ministry of E ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-04-1981
Reported in: (1982)1MLJ378
ORDERG. Ramanujam, J.1. The petitioner herein is a Malaysian citizen holding a Malaysian passport. He had passed the Malaysian Certificate of education at Kualalampur. Thereafter he joined the second year of the Higher Secondary course in St. Bede's Higher Secondary School, Madras and passed the Higher Secondary Examination conducted by the Department of Government Examinations, Madras. Thereafter the petitioner applied to the Government of India for admission in the Regional Engineering College, Tiruchirapalli as a self-financing foreign student for one of the seats reserved for foreign students in the Engineering College in India at the undergraduate level. The Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India which is to nominate candidates for the seats reserved for foreign students in the various Colleges in India nominated the petitioner on 23rd July, 1981 as a candidate for admission in the quota reserved for foreign students in the Regional Engineering College, Tiruchirapalli a...
Tag this Judgment!Bank of Madura Ltd. Vs. the Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Comp ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-04-1981
Reported in: (1982)2MLJ346
ORDERS. Nainar Sundaram, J.1. The second respondent was earlier in the service of the petitioner under contract. However, on 3rd January, 1977, he was appointed as a Probationary Clerk and he was put on probation for a period of six months with effect from 7th January, 1977. Clause 2 of the order of appointment specifically states that at the end of the probationary period if the 2nd respondent is found suitable he will be confirmed and absorbed in the service of the petitioner and the decision of the petitioner will be final. This necessarily implies that if the services of the 2nd respondent are found to be not suitable, his services are liable to be terminated. The manager of the Rajapalayam branch of the petitioner, where the 2nd respondent worked, made his remarks on 14th June, 1977, with regard to the quality of the services rendered by the 2nd respondent during the period of probation as follows:He is a very slow worker and the output of work (productivity) is poor. His handwrit...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Pioneer Engineer Syndicate
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-1981
Reported in: [1991]188ITR287(Mad)
Balasubramanyan, J.1. At the instance of the Income-tax Department, the Tribunal has referred to us the following question of law2 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in cancelling the penalty of Rs. 23,686 levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1964-65?' 2. The assessee is a firm of engineering contractors. It filed a return of income for the assessment year 1964-65. While the assessment proceedings were pending, the assessee filed with the Commissioner of Income-tax a petition under section 271(4A) of the Act under which it offered for assessment the peak credit in the accounts in which it had disclosed its borrowings from certain multani bankers. The peak credit worked out to Rs. 3,25,000. The assessee submitted that these loans from multani bankers were repaid during subsequent years. While reiterating that the hundi borrowings were genuine, it expressed surprise that the hundi ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Trichy United Bank Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-1981
Reported in: [1984]146ITR85(Mad)
Balasubrahmanyan, J. 1. Before 1965, there were three banking companies in Trichirapalli. They were the Woraiyur Commercial Bank Ltd., the Palakkarai Bank Ltd. and the Tennur Bank Ltd. In 1965, the first two banks amalgamated with the third. The amalgamation involved the transfer of all assets and liabilities of the first two banks to the third bank. With such transfer, the two transferor-banks were wound up and dissolved. The transferee-bank continued its existence, with the transferred assets and liabilities along with its own, but it emerged under a new name, the Trichy United Bank. The merger took place on June 24, 1965. The present reference is concerned with income-tax assessments made on this transferee bank subsequent to the merger. Prior to the amalgamation, the three former banks were earning profits. But the profits were not distributed as dividends then and there. They were carried to reserves by each of the banks. Each bank was an independent income-tax assessee. The profi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »