Chennai Court December 1983 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.
P. Surya Rao Vs. Madras Refineries Ltd. Represented by Its Chairman an ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-12-1983
Reported in: (1984)2MLJ318
S. Nainar Sundaram, J.1. This Writ appeal is directed against the order of Mohan, J., in W.P. No. 2327 of 1981. The petitioner in the Writ Petition is the appellant herein. The respondent in the writ petition are the respondents herein. The parties are being referred to in this judgment as per their array in the writ petition. The petitioner is in the employee of the first respondent. Expressing a grievance that his right to promotion to the supervisory cadre has been overlooked from 1975 onwards, that he is entitled to promotion from 1-11-1975 and that respondents 2 to 12 ought not to have been promoted in preference to him, the petitioner filed the writ petition for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the first respondent to promote the petitioner to the supervisory cadre with retrospective effect from 1-11-1975. Mohan, J., heard the matter on 20-1-1983 and the learned Judge took note of the objection put forth on behalf of the respondents with regard to the maintainability of ...
State Bank of India Staff Union and ors. Vs. State Bank of India
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-10-1983
Reported in: (1984)ILLJ306Mad
T. Arulraj, Presiding Officer1. This dispute arising out of a reference under Section 10(1)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 by the Government of India in Order No. L-12012/14/81-D.II(A), dated 15th June, 1982 of the Ministry of Labour is in respect of nonpayment of bonus as usual from 31st December, 1975.2. According to the allegations in the separate claim statements of State Bank of India Staff Union, Madras, State Bank Employees' Union, Madras and State Bank Workmen Staff Union, Madras, the Imperial Bank of India which was the predecessor-in-interest of the Respondent-Bank used to close their books and accounts and declare dividends at the close of the each half year ending on 30th June and 31st December each year. After the close of the first half in 1943, and long Ix-fore the advent of concept of honus in industrial law, the Imperial Bank paid bonus equivalent to one month's basic pay drawn by them on 30th June, 1943 and also 31st December, 1943 to its employees and the Re...
Mohanambal Arnmal Vs. Ramamoorthy and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Mad85; (1984)1MLJ360
ORDER1. This civil revision petition at the instance of -the second defendant in 0. S. No. 211 of 1964, District Munsif s Court, Trivelre, is directed against the order passed by the court below in E. P. 399 of 1979 holding that the execution petition is not barred by limitation. 0. S. 211 of 1964 District Munsifs Court, Trivellore, was instituted by the first respondent herein against the petitioner and the second respondent herein who vere implea&d; as defendants 2 and 3 and another Bagyammal, who was impleaded as the first defendant therein, for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 3216.34, being the amount due on a promissory note dated 9-5-1951 executed by one Sanjeevi Naidu, father of the petitioner and the second respondent and the husband of Bagyammal. On 31-7-1965, the Additional Districi Munsif, Trivellore, dtsmissed that suit; but on appeal in A. S. 342 of 1965 District Court, Chingleput, the learned District Judge allowed the appeal on 5-2-1966. In the course of the judgment in A, ...
Britannia Biscuit Co. Ltd., Employees' Union vs. Asst. Commissioner of ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-1983
Reported in: (1983)ILLJ181Mad
1. The appellant is the writ petitioner.2. The writ petitioner is the Britannia Biscuit Co. Ltd. Employees' Union represented by its Secretary. The writ petition was filed praying for the issue of a writ of declaration, after calling for the records from the Assistant Commissioner of Labour (Headquarters), Tamil Nadu Labour welfare Fund Buildings, Teynampet, Madras (first respondent) relating to the File D. Dis. No. S4/84421/81, dated 14th October, 1981 (filed along with the petition and marked as Ex. A) as null and void and consequently directing the fifth respondent (The Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Chengalpattu at Madras) in No. 1254/81 dated 6th October, 1981.3. The allegations of the petitioner-Union are : The petitioner-Union has a substantial following among the workmen in the second respondent-Company. The petitioner-Union has entered into settlements under S. 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to in this Judgment as the Act) covering all the workme...
V. Jayaraman Vs. Wealth-tax Officer.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-1983
Reported in: [1986]17ITD229(Mad)
ORDERPer Shri T. V. K. Nataraja Chandran, Accountant Member -These appeals by the two separate remaindermen of the property at Jail Road, Coimbatore are consolidated and disposed of by a common order for the sake of convenience as the issue involved is similar and arises from similar orders passed by the Commissioner under section 25(2) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (the Act).2. Late Shri G. D. Naidu gifted certain properties at Jail Road, by way of settlement on 12-12-1940 to his daughter Smt. V. Krishnammal for her life and thereafter to her sons and daughters equally and the sons daughters of her predeceased sons and daughters to get the properties per stripes holding the same absolutely. For the assessment year 1976-77 for which the valuation date is 31-3-1976, the share of the remaindermen shown at Rs. 2,57.500 in the case of Shri V. Jayaraman and Rs. 5,15,000 in the case of Shri V. Rajendran were accepted by the WTO in his orders dated 26-3-1981. Subsequently, the DVO valued such i...
A.V. Malliah Chettiar and Sons Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-1983
Reported in: [1985]153ITR659(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. At the instance of the assessee, the following two questions have been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for the opinion of this court : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that there was information to justify the reopening of the assessment under section 147(b) 2. Whether the Tribunal's finding is merely on the basis of presumption without appreciating the documentary evidence and tenor of the transactions calling for direction to rehear the appeal ?' 2. The assessee is a firm exporting lungies to foreign countries. As a result of the exports made by it, it received incentive import licences for dyes and chemicals. The assessee claimed in the assessment year 1966-67 to have imported dyes and chemicals on the basis of such import licences and sold the dyes and chemicals imported to the following parties : Rs.1. Shri V.N. Subbier ... 21,7362. Central Chemical Agency, Bombay ... 21,7173. Centr...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Tamil Nadu-ii Vs. Mariappa Muthiriyar and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-1983
Reported in: [1985]154ITR466(Mad)
Ratnam, J.1. The assessee in this case applied for registration of the firm consisting of a father and two adult sons and carrying on business in plantains. Prior to the coming into existence of the partnership on April 1, 1973, on the strength of which registration was claimed, the father, Sri Mariappa Muthiriyar, was carrying on business in plantains, such business having been conducted on behalf of the HUF consisting of himself and his two adult sons. The assessee claimed that in the partnership business, one of the sons, Sri M. Natarajan, had contributed a sum of Rs. 5,000 as his share of the capital, which amount was partly received from his father-in-law and partly earned by him and the other son, Sri Kandaswami, had contributed a sum of Rs. 5,000, which amount was stated to have been received by him from his maternal grandfather. The father, Mariyappa Muthiriyar, claimed that he had contributed as capital a sum of Rs. 37,000 from out of the funds of the HUF. Considering the appl...
The State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Raichael Chacko
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-1983
Reported in: [1985]59STC144(Mad)
Ramanujam, J. 1. These two tax revision cases filed by the State arise out of the common order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal allowing the assessee's appeal and dismissing the enhancement petition filed by the State. 2. The assessment year in question is 1978-79 and the turnover in dispute in these tax cases relates to certain purchases of rubber from two persons, Thompson and Jacob. According to the assessee, the purchases made from these two persons are not the first purchases in this State and therefore, the assessee is not liable to pay the purchase tax on her purchase of rubber. This claim of the assessee for exemption on the ground that the turnover represents second purchases of rubber inside the State, was rejected by the assessing authority on the ground that the two persons. Thompson and Jacob, are merely bill traders who lend their names without actually handling the goods and therefore, the assessee should be taken to be the first purchasers of rubber in this State. Ag...
K. Suganthi Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Its Secretary and Commr. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-1983
Reported in: (1984)2MLJ296
P.R. Gokulakrishnan, J.1. The Writ Petitioner by name K. Suganthi is the appellant herein. She filed the Writ Petition for the issue of a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ direction or order, directing the respondents to give effect to the results published by the Selection Committee by admitting her to the first year M.B.B.S. Course, 1982-83. The appellant, after completing her B. Sc, degree course, applied to the medical college in the State of Tamil Nadu to get admission into the first year M.B.B.S. course. In the selection made, she was selected and the same was communicated to her and was also published in local dailies and in the college notice board. On the date of the application, the appellant was admittedly studying in the engineering course in Coimbatore and she has also undergone six months course in Engineering (first semester). The prospectus clearly lays down the guidelines and eligibility for admission to the M.B.B.S. course and Clause 7(1) of the prospectus cl...
Saroja Varadarajan Vs. Kondah Kasi Seetharaman
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-06-1983
Reported in: (1984)2MLJ97
K. Shanmukham, J.1. This second appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law:1 Whether the definition of 'tenant' under the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, in case of death of the 'tenant' will include any one of the legal representatives or all the legal representatives of the deceased tenant?.2. Whether the definition of 'tenant' in so far as the deceased tenant will mean only his spouse or only his son or his daughter or all?3. Whether the word 'or' given in Section 2(8) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act has to be read as 'or' or as 'and'?4. Is not the appellant entitled to have declaration that she is a tenant of the respondent by virtue of Section 2(8) of Act XVIII of 1960 as amended in 1973?5. Whether it will not be open for the landlord to take eviction proceedings against one of the legal representatives of the deceased tenant ignoring the widow and can he execute the same against the other legal representativ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »