Chennai Court July 1981 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.
Rethinasamy Vs. Komalavalli and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-14-1981
Reported in: (1982)2MLJ406
ORDER1. The question that arises for decision in this civil revision petition is, whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to appeals preferred under Section 23(1)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (XVIII of 1960) as amended by Act XXIII of 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The facts are not in controversy. In R.O.C.P. No. 18 of 1979 on the file of the Rent Controller (District Munsif), Sirkali, the first respondent herein obtained an order of eviction against the petitioner herein and his wife, the second respondent herein, on the ground that they had committed wilful default in the payment of rents and also on the ground of personal occupation. The order of eviction was passed on 11th April, 1980, and an appeal against this order of eviction was filed before the Appellate Authority (Sub-Court, Mayuram) on 18th June, 1980. It is not disputed that a delay of 28 days had occurred in preferring the appeal. In I.A. No. 458 of 1980, the petit...
M.R. Electronic Components Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-08-1981
Reported in: (1982)31CTR(Mad)70; [1982]136ITR305(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. This is a reference under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, referring the following questio : 'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that a portion of the royalty paid to the foreign company under the technical aid agreement was capital in nature ?' 2. The assessee was incorporated on December 31, 1962, as a private limited company. It became a public company under s. 43A(2) of the Companies Act of 1956. It carried on the business in manufacture and sale of Morganite Volume Controls. It wanted to manufacture carbon tracks and switch parts and assembling switches in India. M/s. Morganite Register Ltd., is a company incorporated under the English Companies Act in the U.K. It will be referred to as the foreign company hereafter. the foreign company was a manufacture and distributor of carbon tracks, potentiometers and other products, which have a world-wide reputation for their quality and durability. The assessee-company wa...
Nagaiah Vs. P.A. Kaliyappan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-08-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Mad215
Gokulakrishnan, Offg. C.J.1. The appellant herein was the third respondent in W, P. 287 of 1979 against which the present writ appeal has been preferred. The first respondent herein filed the writ petition for the issue of a writ of certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records in B. P. Rt. No. 5207 (L) dated 26-10-78 of the Board of Revenue and in D. Dis No. 106894 dated 10-8-1978. of the Collector of Ramanathapuram and for quashing the same and for directing the authorities to grant a no-objection certificate to the first respondent herein in respect of S. No, 17611 and 2 of Nilamalagiamangalam village, Tiruvadanai Taluk. Ramanathapuram district.2. The short facts of the case are The first respondent herein applied to the Collector of Ramanathapuram at Madurai on 11th May 1978, for issue of a no-objection certificate to him for locating a touring cinema in the site mentioned by him. The appellant filed an application before the Collector for issue of a no-objection certificate to ...
Sundaram Textiles Ltd., Madurai Vs. Assistant Collector of Customs, Ma ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-07-1981
Reported in: 1984(2)ECC265; 1983(13)ELT909(Mad); (1983)IIMLJ92
ORDER1. Both these writ petitions raise identical questions of law and for the purpose of appreciating that questions it is enough if I refer to the facts in W.P. 298 of 1979 alone. 2. The writ petition is for issue of a writ of certiorified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the Import department serial No. 000699 dated 13.12.1978 of the first respondents, to quash the order passed on 21.1.1979 by the first respondent and to direct the first respondent to release the goods without payment of any duty or additional duty. 3. The petitioner is a Public Limited Company registered under the companies Act, 1956. It is carrying on business in the manufacture of Cotton Yarn, cotton/viscose blended yarn. For manufacturing cotton/viscose staple fibers blended yarn, the petitioner company is importing Viscose stable fibre yarn from foreign countries. It had imported under Open General Licence O.G.L. No. 3/78, 142 bales of viscose staple fibre (29999.8 kgs.) valued about Rs. 3,11,465 fr...
P.S. Guna Kumar and ors. Vs. the Ramamurthy Metal Decorating Industrie ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-07-1981
Reported in: (1982)1MLJ203
ORDERS. Suryamurthy, J.1. C.R.P. No. 2465 of 1980 has been preferred by the second defendant and C.R.P. No. 2160 of 1980 has been preferred by defendants Nos. 3 to 5 against an order passed by the trial Court in favour of the first defendant on an application under Order 8-A, Rule 8 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, directing that the question of indemnity or contribution as between the petitioner, the first defendant, and defendants 2 to 5 may also be tried in the same suit. The suit, O.S. No. 240 of 1978 has been instituted by Ramamurthy Metal Decorating Industries (P.) Ltd., against the defendants. The first defendant placed an order with the plaintiff for the purchase of tin containers manumactured by the plaintiff. The first defendant placed the order for supply of 2,000 numbers of 5 kilos Ravico Printed tin containers with lids and capsules on 28th October, 1976. Subsequently a letter, dated 10th November, 1976 was sent to the plaintiff by way of reminder. The order...
Muniandi Kone and ors. Vs. Sri Ramanatha Sethupathi, Hereditary Truste ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-06-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Mad170; (1982)1MLJ20
1. The plaintiffs in O.S. No. 102 of 1975 in the court of the District Munsif, RamariathaDuram are the appellants.2. The suit was filed for a declaration that the plaintiffs were entitled to take Arulmigu Mangaiperumal deity in procession on the tenth day of Chitrotsavarn festival and for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from preventing the plaintiffs in taking the deity in procession and also for a mandatory injunction directing the defendant and his son to take the deity from the sanctum sanctorum for the said procession on every Chitra Pournami day.3. In Uthirakosamangai village, there is a temple called Mangaleswari Samastha Mangalanathaswarni temple. The temple is managed by the Raja of Ramnad as a hereditary trustee. In the same temple, there is a deity of Vishnu called Mangai Perumal. In the month of Chitrai i.e April-May every year, a festival for ten days is celebrated in the temple. On the tenth day festival which corresponds to the Chitra Pournami day, the pl...
T. Sundaramoorthy Vs. P. Kanakaraj and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-03-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Mad130
1. Under S. 158 of the Pondicherry Municipalities Act 1973 (Act 9 of 1973). duty in the form of surcharge on transfer of property shall be levied on every instrument of the description specified in, Schedule VIII relating to immoveable property and situated within the limits of Pondicherry Municipality. The petitioner is the court auction purchaser and was directed to pay duty on the sale certificate issued to him. It was contended that he is not liable to pay surcharge as the sale is not inter vivos between the parties but one effected under operation of law. The court below held that the sale certificate conveys title and surcharge is payable by the court auction purchaser. Against the order of the lower court. the present civil revision petition has been filed.2. The learned counsel for the civil revision petitioner contended that surcharge is not leviable on every instrument of transfer of immovable property, but only on those instruments of transfer of immoveable property describe...
Vaithilinga Velalar Vs. Velayutha Velalar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-03-1981
Reported in: (1982)2MLJ53
V. Sethuraman, J.1. The plaintiff in O.S. No. 1222 of 1972, in the Court of the District Munsif of Pattukkottai is the appellant in the present second appeal. He filed the said suit for mandatory injunction. The property in question in the suit originally belonged to one Kocharan's family. The property bears Survey No. 126|2-B. There was an earlier suit, O.S. No. 517 of 1942 filed by the plaintiff against one Ramaswami, the first defendant's elder brother, who Was the kartha of a joint family, and another in respect of the said survey number. The suit was decreed and in an appeal preferred by the said Ramaswami it was held that one Kulandayyan Nattarasan was entitled to the suit property. The plaintiff accepting this provision, obtained a sale deed from the legal representatives of the said Kulandayyan Nattarasan on 18th September, 1944, in the name of Govinda Velalar. Ramaswami Velalar then, filed O.S. No. 406 of 1946 in the Court of the District Munsif of Pattukottai impleading Govin...
Pandian Roadways Corporation, Madurai Vs. Karunanithi and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-02-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Mad104; (1982)1MLJ107
ORDER1. The Pandian Roadways Corporation has filed this appeal against an award of compensation passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Madurai in M. A. C. O. P. 112 of 1978.2. On 13-2-1978 at about 8-30 a. m. the claimant was Traveling with his brother on a cycle. His younger brother was seated on the back seat. The cycle was coming from North to South near the Indian Bank colony, Natham Road, Maduari. At that time the city bus TMN 5186, belonging to the appellant and driven by the second respondent was coming from South to North. The cycle was proceeding on the left side of the road. At first they came in front of the city bus. On seeing the dogs the second respondent slowed down the bus and the dogs proceeded towards the cycle. In order to avoid the dogs, the brother of the injured slightly turned the cycle towards his right and he lost his balance. The three occupants of the cycle fell down. While the claimant fell down on the right side in front of the cycle, the other two ...
Mangalamma and ors. Vs. Express Newspapers Ltd. and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-02-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Mad223; (1982)1MLJ149
1. This appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Madras in O. P. No. 440 of 1974 dismissing the appellant's claim for compensation in a sum of Rs. 40,000, for the death of one Jayaraman in a motor vehicle accident.2. On 14-8-1974, at about 6-30 a. m. the said deceased Jayaraman was walking in the Express Newspapers estate, Madras, from north to south. At that time lorry MDY 2601 belonging to the first respondent, Express Newspapers Ltd. proceeding from east towards south driven by one Rajamanner knocked him down on account of which he sustained multiple and grievous injuries which ultimately resulted in his death in the hospital. On the basis that the said accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the first respondent's lorry MDY 2601, by its driver the wife and children of the deceased filed a claim petition 0. P, No. 440 of 1974, claiming a compensation of Rs. 40.000, as against the first respondent, the owner of the vehicle and the sec...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›