Chennai Court March 1983 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore Vs. Pranchand Bhandari
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-14-1983
Reported in: [1984]145ITR515(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. The assessee furnished a return under the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1971-72 showing the annual income from his property at No. 24, Krumbigal Road, Bangalore, at Rs. 3,767 and the annual letting value was determined on that basis by the ITO. For the assessment year 1975-76, the value of the property for purposes of wealth-tax assessment was returned at Rs. 2,00,000. As the rental income shown for the assessment year 1971-72 was found to be too low when compared with the value of the property, which was admitted to be two lakhs of rupees in 1975-76 by the assessee, the assessing authority, by invoking his powers under s. 147(b), reopened the assessment for the assessment year 1971-72 and determined the annual letting value of the property at Rs 12,000 under s. 23(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. On appeal by the assessee, the AAC held that the rent receipts as returned by the assessee and the value of the building were already on record at the time of the ITO ma...
Tag this Judgment!Vijaya Bank, Regional Office, Egmore, Madras Vs. Kiran and Co., Madras ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-12-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Mad357
ORDER1. In this civil revision petition at the instance of the second defendant in O.S. No. 6931 of 1980, III Assistant Judge, City Civil Court at Madras where the suit had been instituted had jurisdiction to entertain the same. On 20-3-1980, the first respondent, which is a partnership firm, applied for and obtained from the Karnataka Bank, Madras, the second respondent herein, an account payee draft for a sum of Rs. 15344, payable to one R. Ramesh Kumar of Bombay, payable at the Bombay Port branch of the Karnataka Bank and sent it by post to the payee. The payee R. Ramesh Kumar, did not receive the draft sent to him by the first respondent and he had instructed the Bombay Port branch of the Karnataka Bank (the second respondent herein) to stop payment. In turn, on 28-3-1980, the first respondent instructed the second respondent to stop payment. In the reply sent by the second respondent on 9-4-1980, the second respondent informed the first respondent that the draft in question had be...
Tag this Judgment!P. Sundararajan Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-10-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Mad349
ORDER1. Writ petitioner was issued a 'C' form licence to establish a permanent theatre called, `Rakki Theatre' in Ambattur and started exhibiting films from 24-4-1981. Petitioner claims to have spent about Rs.15 lakhs. Third respondent obtained a no objection certificate and a C form licence to establish a touring cinema for the period from 21-5-1980 to 19-4-1981 was granted, and thereafter, applied for renewal beyond 19-4-1981. Since his application was hit by R 14(2) of Tamil Nadu Cinemas(Regulation) Rules, as third respondent's touring talkies was within the prohibited distance of the petitioner's theatre, which had commenced on 24-4-1981, second respondent did not renew the licence, but granted only an 'E' permit, as an indulgence, so that he may close down the cinema within reasonable time, granted by him upto 19-6-1981. On 20-6-1981 third respondent's touring cinema was stopped.2. Petitioner was served with a notice on 19-3-1982, asking him whether he has got any objection to thi...
Tag this Judgment!The Employees State Insurance Corporation, Represented by Its Regional ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-10-1983
Reported in: (1984)1MLJ45
K.B.N. Singh, C.J. 1. This appeal by the Employees State Insurance Corporation has been filed against an adverse order of the Employees, State Insurance Court.2. The respondent, a joint stock company; filed an application under Sections 75 and 77 of the Employees' State Insurance Act XXXIV of 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), alleging that on 11th April, 1972, a settlement was entered into between the respondent and its workmen under which an Incentive Scheme was introduced for payment of incentive earnings to the workmen depending upon the increased production. The scheme also provided for payment of ad hoc allowance. In the settlement it has been further agreed that the abovesaid two categories of payment will not be reckoned for purposes of provident fund, bonus, gratuity, Employees' State Insurance contribution, etc. In had been further agreed that the other conditions governing the incentive payment will be published separately. Following the same, the said scheme was pub...
Tag this Judgment!K.S. Ameena Shapir Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu Represented by Its Secr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-10-1983
Reported in: (1984)1MLJ237
ORDERS. Mohan, J.1. The petitioner was originally a Hindu. She belonged to Pillaimar community. She got married to one Janab Shapir after em bracing Islam. The marriage took place on 24th December, 1968. The husband of the petitioner belongs to Muslim Labbai community. The said community has been included in the list of Backward classes. Ever since her conversion to Islam, the petitioner has been professing only Islam. The community has also recognised her marriage. In addition to that, the petitioner and her daughter Athya have been treated and accepted as members of her husband's community.2. She submitted an application for appointment as Tutor in Tamil Nadu Government Arts College in the Tamil Nadu Educational Subordinate Services on 30th July, 1973. Along with her application she filed a certificate to the effect that she had embraced Islam and that on her marrying Janab Shapir, she had been accepted by the members of her husband's community as one amongst them and consequent to c...
Tag this Judgment!Janardhana Raja Vs. the Collector of North Arcot District and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-10-1983
Reported in: (1983)2MLJ219
ORDERS. Mohan, J.1. The facts leading to the writ petition lie in a narrow compass. The petitioner is the proprietor of Raja Touring Talkies. He was granted a 'C Form licence by an order of the Collector of North Arcot made in K. 162898 2of 1979, dated 14th January, 1980. As the rule then stood, namely 109 (1-A), the licence period was three years. Therefore, the, validity of the licence was only up till 15th January, 1983. Though the licence period was three years then, presently, by reason of the amendment made in G.O.Ms. No. 461, dated 24th February, 1982, it is five years. The licence is to be granted initially for a period of one year and then renewed! each year. This renewal is subject to one of the most important conditions that after inspection as contemplated under Rule 113, the licensing authority is satisfied that the site and the Building continue to conform to the relevant rules and the building is structurally sound. I should at once state that this rule is peculiar to tr...
Tag this Judgment!Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax, Tamil Nadu-ii Vs. Pandian Plantation ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-08-1983
Reported in: [1984]148ITR86(Mad)
Ramanujam, J. 1. In the above five cases, the following common question of law has been referred to this court under s. 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the receipts from clearing the forest trees for planting the cleared area with plantations and the sale proceeds of timber logs of such felled trees would only amount to realisation of capital ?' 2. One A. K. P. Doraiswamy Nadar and his four sons on acquiring an estate called 'Aruna Group of Estates' consisting of 1,856 acres of cardamom, coffee and pepper plantations and also about 887 acres of forest land with standing timber for a sum of Rs. 6,45 lakhs, formed a partnership among themselves on May 17, 1960, under the name and style of Pandian Plantations, and the objects of the partnership are stated as follows : 'The objects of the partnership are owning, working, developing and planting of cardamoms, coffee, tea and o...
Tag this Judgment!Andhra Marine Exports (P) Ltd. and anr. Vs. P. Radhakrishnan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-08-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Mad358
1. The proceedings which have come upto this Court arise out of an accident, which took place on 6th May, 1978 at about 11.20 a.m. or 11.40 a.m. and which involved the bus belonging to the Kattabomman Transport Corporation Ltd, hereinafter referred to as the Transport Corporation, and the van belonging to Andhra Marine Exports Private Ltd., hereinafter referred to as the owners. The van was insured with the United India Fire and General Insurance Co., hereinafter referred to as the Insurance Company. One A. Pathrose was the driver of the van. One Natarajan was the driver of the bus. P. Radhakrishnan was a passenger in the bus. We will presently come to the question as to the nature of and the manner in which the accident took place and as to who is to be held culpable for the accident. In the accident, Natarajan, the driver of the bus, and another passenger in the bus died at the spot. P. Radhakrishnan sustained injuries, the details of which we will have occasion to refer to in the co...
Tag this Judgment!H.P. Ramakrishna Rao Vs. the Assistant Collector and Licensing Authori ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-08-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Mad361
ORDER1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the proceedings of the first respondent dt. 10-9-1982 suspending the petitioner's licence to vend arrack for the excise year 1982-83. 2. The sixth respondent herein made a surprise inspection of arrack shop No.11 of Hosur Town in Dharmapuri district on 20-8-1982 at about 10 a.m. along with the third and fifth respondents. At the time of the inspection one Raja was found selling arrack in the above arrack shop of which the petitioner is the licencee for the year 1982-83 and six plastic cans of 50 litres capacity each fitted with taps were found in the adjoining room within the licenced premises. Of them three cans were found to contain illicit arrack of 10, 5 and 12 litres. As the arrack is to be sold in bottles as bottled by the blending unit and no arrack shall be sold loose, the petitioner was found to have contravened R.12 of the Tamil Nadu Arrack (Retail Shop) Rules 1981, hereinafter ...
Tag this Judgment!Andhra Marine Exports (P) Ltd. and anr. Vs. P. Radhakrishnan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-08-1983
Reported in: (1984)2MLJ12
S. Nainar Sundaram, J.1. The proceedings which have come upto this Court arise out of an accident, which took place on 6th May, 1978 at about 11.20 a.m. or 11.40 a.m. and which involved the bus belonging to the Kattabomman Transport Corporation Ltd, hereinafter referred to as the Transport Corporation, and the van belonging to Andhra Marine Exports Private Ltd., hereinafter referred to as the owners. The van was insured with the United India Fire and General Insurance Co., hereinafter referred to as the Insurance Company. One A. Pathrose was the driver of the van. One Natarajan was the driver of the bus. P. Radhakrishnan was a passenger in the bus. We will presently come to the question as to the nature of and the manner in which the accident took place and as to who is to be held culpable for the accident. In the accident, Natarajan, the driver of the bus, and another passenger in the bus died at the spot. P. Radhakrishnan sustained injuries, the details of which we will have occasion...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »