Chennai Court January 1987 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.
i.M.H. Ravindaranath and anr. Vs. M.L. Hanumantha Rao and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-13-1987
Reported in: (1987)2MLJ384
V. Ramaswami, J.1. O.S.A. No. 36 of 1978 has been filed by the plaintiffs in C.S. No. - 82 of 1975 and O.S.A. No. 14 of 1979 has been filed by defendants 7 and 8 in C.S. No. 126 of 1972. Plaintiffs 3 and 4, and defendants 1 and 2 in C.S. No. 126 of 1972, are the sons of one Loganatha Mudaliar. The first appellant in these appeals is the son of the first defendant, and the second appellant is the son of the first appellant. The said Loganatha Nfludaliar consecrated Sri Sai Baba, his family deity, in a Sai Baba temple at Guindy, maintained by a Trust, called 'Sri Sathya Sai Mandali'. This Sri Sathya Sai Mandali Trust, which will hereinafter be referred to as the 'Trust is managed by a Board of Trustees. Under a Trust deed dated 3.2.1949, the said Loganatha Mudaliar created the Trust and endowed two items of properties which are shown as 'A' and 'C schedules in C.S. No. 82 of 1975. By a gift deed dated 4.12.1946, the said Loganatha Mudaliar gifted B Schedule house and ground bearing door ...
Selvaraj Vs. K. Mumtaz Begum
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-12-1987
Reported in: AIR1987Mad261; (1987)IIMLJ27
ORDER1. The above civil revision petition is by the tenant and is directed against the order of eviction passed on him by both the Courts below on the ground of wilful default in the payment of rent and for affording additional accommodation to the landladies.2. The facts giving rise to the present revision briefly are as follows : Eviction proceedings relate to that portion of door No. 196 in Market Road, Arni, which is in the occupation of the petitioner and in which he is running a hotel. The premises belonged to the respondents-landladies, who sought eviction against the petitioner under Ss. 10(2)(1)(iii) and 10(3)(c) of the TamiI Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), on the averment that the petitioner committed wilful default in the payment of rent from2l-3-1981 to 1-12-1981 and also that they needed the premises as additional accommodation for the business run by their husbands under the name and style of M. M. Electricals in the back ...
Podikutty and ors. Vs. N. Rahiath Beevi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-09-1987
Reported in: (1987)2MLJ431
Srinivasan, J.1. Defendants 1 and 3 to 7 are the appellants in this second appeal. The suit out of which this appeal arises was one for redemption of a mortgage. A preliminary decree was passed on 13.10.1970. According to the preliminary decree, the plaintiff was to deposit a sum of Rs. 96.25 as mortgage money. Alleging that by virtue of the provisions of Tamil Nadu Act IV of 1938 the mortgage money got scaled down to zero, the plaintiff filed I.A.No. 1142 of 1980 for passing of final decree. In that application, the plaintiff stated as follows:4. The preliminary decree directs the plaintiffs to deposit Rs. 96-25 as mortgage money. No money need be deposited now because the entire mortgage money stands scaled down to zero under Act IV of 1938. I am filing another petition to amend the preliminary decree in this behalf.5. The question of value of improvements has been, relegated to the final decree. If the defendants take out a commission and get the value of improvements assessed and a...
Standard Electric Appliances Vs. the Addl. Secretary to Government of ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-08-1987
Reported in: 1988(17)ECC162
S. Nainar Sundaram, J.1. The petitioner had a grievance over the order of the third respondent, dated 18-3-1978, with regard to his decline to consider the request of the petitioner for eligibility to have their goods assessed at the preferential value. This order of the third respondent was served on the petitioner on 3-8-1978. As per Section 35 of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 (Act I of 1944), hereinafter referred to as the Act, prior to its substitution in 1980, an appeal from the above order should be preferred within three months from the date of the order. It is not in dispute that 'the date of order' is to receive a wider connotation so as to say that the appeal could be preferred from the date of the service of the order. But, 'there was no provision for condonation of delay earlier, in contrast to such a provision introduced by the amendment in 1980. The petitioner sent the appeal as against the order of the third respondent to the second respondent, by post and it was...
Sankaracharyar Mutt Vs. State of Tamil Nadu. (Commissioner of Agricult ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-07-1987
Reported in: [1988]170ITR229(Mad)
Swamikkannu, J. 1. This tax case revision is filed by Sri Sankaracharyar Mutt by Sri Karyam and Agent, Kumbakonam, against the order of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, dated April 27, 1978, passed in ATA No. 158 of 1977 with respect to the assessment year 1976-77 remanding the matter. The appeal before the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, was filed by the petitioner herein against the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Thanjavur, dated July 30, 1977, for the assessment year 1976-77 in A. No. 80 of 1977E. 2. Now, this revision is confined to the following order of the Tribunal wherein it was held that the petitioner has not obtained any such statutory exemption under the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Act from the Government of Tamil Nadu, and that there is no provision in the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Act enabling the Agricultural Income-tax Officer to grant exemption in the case ...
Southern Automatic Industries (P) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Collector of Cent ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-07-1987
Reported in: 1987(12)ECC232; 1987(30)ELT693(Mad)
1. The petitioner, in respect of the circlips manufactured by it, wanted to take advantage of Notification No. 99/71-C.E., dated 29-5-1971. That notification reads as follows : 'Notification No. 99/71-C.E., dated 29-5-1971.2. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the Central Government hereby exempts motor vehicle parts and accessories, falling under Item No. 34A of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of 1944), other than those specified in the Schedule hereto annexed, from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon. THE SCHEDULE : 1. Brake linings. 2. Clutch facings. 3. Engine valves. 4. Gaskets. 5. Nozzles and nozzle holders. 6. Piston rings. 7. Shock absorbers. 8. Sparking plugs. 9. Thin-walled bearings. 10. Tie rod ends. 11. Electric horns.' 3. Item 34A of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (Act 1 of 1944), hereinafter referred to as the Act, as it stood ...
Hindustan Import Export Corporation Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-07-1987
Reported in: [1988]69STC195(Mad)
Swamikkannu, J. 1. This is an appeal preferred by the appellant, Messrs. Hindustan Import Export Corporation, Madras-1, under section 37 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, against the order of the Board of Revenue dated 30th June, 1978 made in its B.P. Rt. No. 2185 of 1978, with respect to the assessment year 1973-74. The appellant was assessed on the reported total and taxable turnovers of Rs. 49,11,678 and Rs. 49,04,126 respectively under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Sales Tax Act') for the assessment year 1973-74, by order of the assessing authority T.N.G.S.T. No. 11080 of 1973-74 dated 11th June, 1976. The levy of tax was as detailed below : Rs. 45,33,628 was taxed at 3 1/2 per cent Rs. 3,49,442 was taxed at 7 per cent Rs. 28,759 was taxed at 9 per cent. It was noticed by the assessing authority that the dealer had collected surcharge amounting to Rs. 3,276.67 on the sales effected in its branch at Sivakasi. The sales do ...
Deputy Commissioner (Ct), Coimbatore Division, Coimbatore Vs. Pankaja ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-1987
Reported in: 1989(43)ELT259(Mad)
Swamikkannu, J. 1. This is a revision in which the Revenue has mainly stressed the point that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to remand the case for an assessment on certain grounds which were not specifically taken in the grounds of appeal before it or before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. In the instant case, the Tribunal has remanded the appeal to the assessing officer with the following observation : 'But the authorised representative had urged that the assessing officer has not considered the sales returns and the sales turnover not fructified. This issue had to be decided only after a close scrutiny of the accounts and the documents available with the appellant. Further, the appellant's mill is a sick mill and is under the control of the National Textile Corporation Ltd. Considering the above aspects, we hold that the appellant may be given another chance to prove his claim and accordingly we set aside the levy of assessment and remand the case to the assessing officer wi...
The State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Everest Trading Co.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-1987
Reported in: [1987]67STC148(Mad)
Swamikkannu, J.1. This is a revision petition filed by the State of Tamil Nadu represented by the Deputy Commissioner (C.T.), Madras Division, Madras-1, for reversing the order of the Second Additional Bench of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in T.M.P. No. 508 of 1977 in T.A. No. 64 of 1977, allowing the petition and setting aside the order passed in T.A. No. 64 of 1977, sustaining the addition of Rs. 10,000 made to the taxable turnover of the assessee for the assessment year 1975-76, and holding that the disputed turnover of Rs. 10,000 being the subject-matter of appeal in T.A. No. 64 of 1977 forms the taxable turnover of the assessee determined for the assessment year 1975-76 is not correct. 2. The learned Government Pleader contends that the order under revision is erroneous in the sense that the Tribunal has not properly appreciated the scope and extent of power vested in it under section 55 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. It is submitted on behalf of the Revenue th...
Mohammad Farook and ors. Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu Reptd. by the Col ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-1987
Reported in: (1987)2MLJ282
V. Ramaswami, J.1. A village known as Pavadai Thope was notified and taken over as an existing inam estate under the Madras Inams Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act 26 of 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) with effect from 2.4.1971. Suo motu enquiry under the provisions of the Act was initiated by the Assistant Settlement Officer, Tanjore. The village had been given as Abisheka Kattalai inam to Arulmigu Thiagarajaswamy Devasthanam, Tiruvarur. The dispute in these proceedings relates to four different itemsof properties. The first item is of an extent of 9,279 sq.ft., comprised in Town Survey Nos. 644, 645 part and 646 part. The second item is of an extent of 200 sq.ft. forming part of T.S. No. 646 part and used as a passage for the first item and the third item. The third item is of an extent of 1,337 sq.ft., comprised in T.S. Nos. 645 part and 646 part. The fourth item is of an extent of 454 sq.ft., comprised in T.S. No. 746/1. In the first item, there is a su...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›