Chennai Court April 1984 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.
Kasi and ors. Vs. Govt. of Tamil Nadu and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-11-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Mad169
Gokulakrishnan, J. 1. The appellants herein filed the writ petition, out of which the present writ appeal arises, for the issue of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents not to evict the appellants, or forbearing them from taking any proceedings for eviction of the appellants and disturb their possession and enjoyment of their houses at Raja Muthiapuram, Raja Annamalaipuram, Madras. The appellants are the residents of that locality from which, according to the appellants, the second respondent is trying to evict them forcibly. The appellants originally occupied the tenements in the land; and these tenements were built by the Government as fire proof tenements some years back. Subsequently the second respondent wanted to clear off this area, after demolishing the tenements, in order to put up a multi-storeyed building to accommodate not only the dwellers of these tenements, but also others in the slums. No doubt, the second respon...
Kasi and ors. Vs. Govt. of Tamil Nadu Reptd. by Secretary, Labour Depa ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-11-1984
Reported in: (1984)2MLJ205
P.R. Gokulakrishnan, J.1. The appellants herein filed the writ petition, out of which the present writ appeal arises, for the issue of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents not to evict the appellants, or forbearing them from taking any proceedings for eviction of the appellants and disturb their possession and enjoyment of their houses at Raja Muthiapuram, Raja Annamalaipuram, Madras. The appellants are the residents of that locality from which, according to the appellants the second respondent is trying to evict them forcibly.The appellants originally occupied the tenements in this land, and these tenements were built by the Government as fire-proof tenements some years back. Subsequently, the second respondent wanted to clear off this area, after demolishing the tenements, in order to put up a multi-storeyed building to accommodate not only the dwellers of these tenements, but also others in the slums. No doubt, the second re...
The State of Tamil Nadu Vs. I.B.M. World Trade Corporation
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-10-1984
Reported in: [1985]60STC118(Mad)
Ramanujam, J. 1. Since all these tax revision cases are interconnected and they raise the same question, they are dealt with together. 2. The assessees in these cases are IBM World Trade Corporation who have been registered as dealers under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. For the assessment year 1973-74 the assessee returned a total and taxable turnover of Rs. 1,82,32,991 and Rs. 3,53,048 respectively. The assessing officer however determined the total and taxable turnover at Rs. 2,82,99,836 and Rs. 1,53,26,659 respectively. The assessee had claimed exemption on the following turnover : (a) Data service charges 29,72,807.51(b) Sales to foreign embassies 53.68(c) Sales of books (manuals) 316.00(d) Sales in the course of import 150,06,766.75------------------179,79,943.94-------------------3. The assessing officer allowed the claim for exemption on the first three items but rejected the claim as regards the last item, on the ground that the sales of IBM Computer System Type N...
The State of Tamil Nadu Vs. William Jacks and Company (India) Private ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-10-1984
Reported in: [1985]59STC90(Mad)
1. Since both the tax revision cases relate to the same assessee but for different assessment years and they arise out of a common judgment rendered by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, they are dealt with together. 2. The assessee, M/s. William Jacks & Company (India) Private Limited, reported total and taxable turnovers of Rs. 69,74,726 and Rs. 40,16,719 respectively for the assessment year 1973-74. However on a check of the accounts, the assessing authority disallowed exemptions among other things a turnover of Rs. 3,86,051.08 which the assessee claimed to relate to sales in the course of import. In the assessment year 1974-75, the assessee reported a total turnover of Rs. 58,60,364.09 and taxable turnover of Rs. 27,50,259.22. The assessing authority on a check of the accounts, disallowed the exemption, among other things, a turnover of Rs. 14,877.66 which according to the assessee represented the sales in the course of import. 3. Aggrieved by the order of disallowance of the exempt...
Baluswami Chettiar Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-1984
Reported in: [1986]63STC492(Mad)
Gokulakrishnan, J. 1. The assessee in this case is running a metal oiling mill under the name and style of 'Balu Metal Rolling Mills'. He is also dealing in brass vessels and doing business in Angeripalayam, Tirupur. For the assessment year 1969-70 he was finally assessed on total taxable turnover of Rs. 13,51,129.40 by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer (Rural), Tirupur. On 20th July, 1971, the intelligence wing of the sales tax department inspected the assessee's business premises at Angeripalayam and recovered certain account books and slips relating to his business. On a scrutiny of the same with the regular accounts maintained by the assessee, the intelligence wing found that the assessee has suppressed a sales turnover of Rs. 7,95,709.72. This escaped assessment was added to the total taxable turnover originally fixed and the total was arrived at Rs. 21,46,839.12. On this assessee was assessed under section 16(1) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as ...
A. Lakshminarasimhan Vs. the Dean, Madras Veterinary College, Madras-7 ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-06-1984
Reported in: (1984)IILLJ28Mad
ORDER1. The Petitioner herein has prayed for the issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the communication of the first respondent dated 1st July, 1983 and to direct the respondents to retire the petitioner on the basis of his letter dated 7th February, 1982 with effect from 7th June, 1982 with all monetary benefits without insisting upon him to pay the leave salary contribution at 11% on the salary drawn by him at Ahamadu Bello University at Nigeria. 2. The circumstances under which this writ petition came to be filed may briefly be noted : The Petitioner joined service in the Animal Husbandry Department of the Tamil Nadu Government in the year 1949 as Veterinary Assistant Surgeon. In 1954 the Petitioner was posted as Assistant Lecturer in the Department of Anatomy. Later he passed Ph.D. in Denmark. As a result of his acquiring post-graduate qualification, the petitioner was posted as Head of Anatomy, and as such Professor of Anatomy in the Madras Veterinary College. While...
Subbiah Vs. Muthuswamy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-06-1984
Reported in: AIR1984Mad206; (1984)1MLJ354
ORDER1. In this Civil Revision Petition at the instance of the first defendant in 0. S. No. 27 of 1983, District Munsiff's Court, Tirunelveli, the question that aitses for consideration is, whether the Court below was right in the view it took that it had no jurisdiction to entertain an application for review filed before it by the petitioner. Originally, the first respondent in. situated. S. No. 217 of 1978 before the Sub Court, Tuticorin, against the Petitioner and the second respondent herein for the recovery of amounts due under a mortgage dated 29-5-1972. Subsequently, owing to the enlargement of the pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Munsiff's Court, the suit instituted by the first respondent herein before the Sub Court, Tuticorin, stood transferred to the file of the District Munsiff's Court, Tuticorin. Before that Court, the first 'respondent herein prayed in 1. A. No. 1293 of 1982 for an amendment of the plaint. Some objections were raised by the petitioner and after over...
Suresh Babu Vs. Madhu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-06-1984
Reported in: AIR1984Mad186; (1984)1MLJ381
1. This appeal arises out of proceedings initiated by the respondent herein, who is the wife of. the appellant, in P. No. 195 of 1983, District Court, Tim chirappalli, under Sec. 25 of the Guardians the child, the respondent filed the application and Wards Act, (Act VIII of 1890), read with S. P, No. 195 of 1983 before the with S. 6(a) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act (Act 32 of 1956), praying for A return of the custody of the minor daughter Meera alias Pincky, aged about a year and a half. 2. The circumstances under which the proceedings were instituted by the respondent herein are as under; on 10-12-1980, the respondent was married to the appellant at Tiruchirappalli and thereafter the appellant and the respondent had been living as husband and wife. According to the case of the respondent, their marital life was a long story of grief, distress and sorrow on account of the ill-treatment meted out to her by the appellant right from the very -beginning. The appellant belonge...
S. Karuppanna Gounder Vs. S. Ramaswamy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-06-1984
Reported in: (1984)2MLJ207
ORDERG. Ramanujam, J.1. This revision is directed against the concurrent decision of the Courts below dismissing the suit O.S. No. 2491 of 1979 on the file of the Court of the District Munsif of Karur.2. The petitioner herein filed an earlier suit, O.S. No. 727 of 1978 on the file of the Court of the District Munsif of Karur, against the respondent herein for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,137-50 due on a promissory note executed by the respondent in favour of the petitioner for Rs. 1,500/-Though the promissory note was executed for Rs. 1,500/- by the respondent-defendant, in view of the fact that the respondent was entitled to the benefit of Tamil Nadu Act 40/78, the amount borrowed under the promissory note, as scaled down under the provisions of the said Act, was claimed in the suit. The said suit was decreed for the amount claimed by the petitioner and the amount has also been realised by the petitioner from the respondent. Subsequently the Tamil Nadu Act 40 of 1978 was repealed by the...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. L. Balasubramaniam and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-05-1984
Reported in: (1984)40CTR(Mad)150; [1985]153ITR696(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following common question of law has been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for its opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee should be assessed in the status of a Hindu undivided family in respect of the income derived from the properties got by him on partition between him and his two brothers and which properties were originally purchased by the assessee's grandfather in the joint names of the assessee and his brothers ?' 2. The assessee in T.C. Nos. 506 to 508 of 1979 is one L. Balasubramaniam and the relevant assessment years are 1972-73 to 1974-75. The assessee in T.C. Nos. 527 to 529 of 1979 is one L. Borai Gowder and the relevant assessment years 1972-73 to 1974-75. The assessees in the above cases are brothers. The assessees' grandfather, one Boraiah Gowder, had purchased from time to time agricultural lands in Konnamala...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »