Chennai Court July 1987 Judgments
Hamsa Patel and ors. Vs. S. Balakrishnan and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-1987
Reported in: (1989)1MLJ57
S.A. Kader, J.1. The appeals in A.S.Nos.623 and 875 of 1980 arise out of the judgment and decree of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, of Coimbatore in O.S. No. 412 of 1977. The fifth defendant therein is the appellant in A.S. No. 623 of 1980. The defendants 1 and 2 therein are the appellants in A.S. No. 875 of 1980. C.M.A. No. 430 of 1980 is against the order and decretal order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore in I A. No. 1420 of 1978 in O.S. No. 412 of 1977. The petitioner/5th defendants is the appellant. C.MA. No. 452 of 1980 is against the order and decretal order of the said subordinate Judge in IA. No. 213 of 1978 in O.S. No. 412 of 1977. The petitioners/defendants 1 and 2 are the appellants. C.M.P. No. 4891 of 1985 has been filed by the appellant in A.S. No. 623 of 1980 for reception of additional evidence.2. This is a suit for recovery of possession of the plaint schedule property, for arrears of rent and for damages for use and occupation on the following averment...
Tag this Judgment!Gowar Chand Vs. the Superintendent of Police and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-30-1987
Reported in: 1988CriLJ1399
ORDERPadmini Jesudurai, J.1. The petitioner, who is the maternal uncle of the deceased Prabha Kumari, wife of the fifth respondent herein and daughter-in-law of respondents 3 and 4, invokes the inherent powers of this Court, for a direction to the concerned police to enquire into the death of the above Prabha Kumari and to pass such further orders as this Court might deem fit.2. The facts giving rise to the present petition are briefly as follows. The deceased Prabha Kumari, aged 20 years, at the time of her death on 21-3-1987, is a native of Rajasthan. Her parents had moved over to Hassan in Karnataka State and were doing business there. She was their eldest daughter. She was married to the 5th respondent herein on 14-12-1985 at Rajasthan. Respondents3 to 5 reside in Kancheepuram, wherein the deceased also took up her residence. Even prior to the marriage, there had been demand for dowry, jewels, silver vessels, and in addition articles like Fridge, Television etc. An agreement had be...
Tag this Judgment!Rathikanthammal Vs. B. Pankajammal and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-27-1987
Reported in: (1988)ILLJ423Mad
Ramaswami, J. 1. This is an appeal against the order of the learned single Judge of this Court allowing a writ petition filed by the 1st respondent. One J. D. Chandran was an employee under the father of the 1st respondent and was working as Manager in respect of the Transport Company owned by the father. The said proprietor, Bhoopathy Naidu, died and his wife, ie., the mother of the 1st respondent, succeeded to the stage carriage permit held by him. The said Chandran filed a petition under Section 33-C(2) claiming certain unpaid salary. Pending the application under Section 33-C(2), the said Chandran died on 14th March 1976. The mother of the deceased, one Subhadrai Ammal, was brought on record as the legal representative of the deceased worker on 1st April 1977 in I.A. No. 461 of 1976, overruling the objections raised by the 1st respondent and holding that the legal representative of a workman can bring herself on record and claim the dues payable to the deceased workman. That order ...
Tag this Judgment!Navrathan and Co. Vs. State (income-tax Officer, Central Circle, Madra ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-24-1987
Reported in: [1987]62CompCas832(Mad)
Padmini Jesudurai, J.1. The petitioner, a chartered accountant, prosecuted along with an income-tax assessee, on a complaint filed by the respondents, before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Madras, in CC No. 151 of 1985 for offences under sections 120B, 193, 196, 420 and 511, Indian Penal Code and sections 276C, 277 and 278 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', invokes the inherent powers of this court to quash the same 2. Facts briefly are :One Adhimulam,a transport contractor, arrayed as the first accused (the petitioner being the second accused) and doing business in transport of oil, etc., from storage points and installations of Indian Oil Corporation, Bharat Petroleum and Hindustan Petroleum Corporation, to various factories in and around Madras, filed on July 30, 1983, a return of income, along with profit and loss account and balance-sheet for the assessment year 1983-84. It is alleged that on October 27, 1983, a search of his business...
Tag this Judgment!Bank of Madura Ltd. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-24-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Mad267
ORDER1. The prayer in the writ petition runs follows: 'For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, the petitioner herein prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to call for the records pertaining to the order of the lst respondent contaiped in its letter Ms. No. 1230 dated 28-8-1980 by issue of writ of certiorarified mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order of like nature and quash the order of the 1st respondent contained in its letter Ms. No. 1230 dated 28-8-1980 and direct the 1st respondent to full its obligations and commitments under the deed of guarantee dated 21-6-1968 executed by the 1st respondent in favour of the petitioner on behalf of Sarada Mills and pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble courtmay deem fit and proper in the circurnstances of the case.' There is no dispute that the deed of guarantee dated 21-6-1968, referred to in the prayer in the writ petition was executed by the first respondent, represented by the second resp...
Tag this Judgment!M.R. Samiappan Vs. the Secretary to Government, Revenue Department
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-23-1987
Reported in: (1988)1MLJ364
V. Ramaswami, J.1. The appellant had encroached upon an extent of 61 cents in S.No. 19 of Maravapalyam village which was classified as Manthai poromboke in the revenue records. Some encroachment proceedings were taken against him. On 31.12.1971 he applied for the assignment of the land on the ground that he is a landless poor. This was rejected by the Collector in his proceedings R.C. No. 68096/71/B.7, dated 4.1.1972. The petitioner preferred an appeal against this order to the Board of Revenue. The Board of Revenue noticed in their order dated 8.9.1972 that the petitioner owned two acres of land in the said village, that he has subsequently sold it to his wife and his sister and that from out of the said amount, he is running a tea shop and a bunk. It was also noticed that he was getting an income of Rs. 10 per day from the tea shop and the bunk, and inasmuch as the petitioner has sold the' land already owned by him and is now running a tea shop and a bunk, he cannot be considered to ...
Tag this Judgment!Ebrahim Bathu Vs. the District Revenue Officer and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-21-1987
Reported in: (1987)2MLJ288
V. Ramaswami, J.1. This is an appeal against the order of the learned single Judge of this Court dismissing the writ petition. The writ petition was filed by the appellant praying for issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the order of the 1st respondent in his proceeding K. Dis. No. 109915/80 dated 24.10.1980 by which the application of the petitioner for the grant of permit under Section 5 of the Rice Milling Industry (Regulation) Act, 1958 for the establishment of a new rice mill was dismissed.2. The petitioner applied on 15.5.1980 for the grant of a permit to instal a rice mill in T.S. No. 6/11, Ward D of the Devakottai Municipal Town within the limits of Irugucheri Revenue Group. This was rejected on the ground that there are already 19 rice mills functioning in the locality with a hulling capacity of 2,37,500 bags of paddy of 75 K.Gs. per year and that the availability of paddy is too insufficient to feed even the 19 existing mills and does not warrant establishment ...
Tag this Judgment!N. Kalavathi and anr. Vs. Nagarajan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-1987
Reported in: I(1990)DMC285
K.M. Natarajan, J.1. This appeal is directed by the respondents in O.P. No. 16 of 1984 on the file of the District Judge, East Thanjavur at Nagapattinam, challenging the legality and correctness of the order passed by the said court directing second appellant herein to hand over the minor boy Manikandan aged about 9 years to the respondent herein.2. The facts which are necessary for the disposal of the appeal may briefly be set out as follows :--For the convenience of proper appreciation of the case, we shall adopt the rank of the parties given before the lower court. The petitioner is the father of the minor boy Manikantan and he filed the petition under Section 10 of the Guardian and Wards Act read with Section 6 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, for declaring him as the guardian of the minor Manikantan and he is entitled to receive the custody of the boy from the second respondent and also for directing the second respondent to handover the child to him. It is seen that th...
Tag this Judgment!Sambanda Mudaliar Vs. Muthuswami Mudaliar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-1987
Reported in: (1989)1MLJ414
ORDERK.M. Natarajan, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the Subordinate Judge, Tirupattur, allowing the application to remove the obstruction, under Order 21, Rule 97, C.P. Code.2. The facts which are necessary for the disposal of this appeal are briefly as follows: The respondent filed a suit on mortgage in O.S. No. 106 of 1971 on 20-12-1971 and obtained a preliminary decree on 29.2.1973. The final decree was passed on 30.10.1973. The mortgaged property was brought to sale in execution of the said decree in court auction and the respondent purchased the same on 19.9.1973. The sale was confirmed on 29.10.1973. When the respondent came to take possession of the property on 24.12.1973, the appellant herein obstructed the same.3. The appellant resisted deliver of possession on the ground that he filed a suit for recovery of money on 11.3.1971, in O.S. No. 180 of 1971 and an order of attachment was obtained on 12.3.1971. The suit was decreed on 26.6.1971. IN E.P. 64 o...
Tag this Judgment!The Coimbatore Athar Jamath, an Association Registered Under the Socie ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-16-1987
Reported in: (1987)2MLJ438
Srinivasan, J.1. The plaintiff in the suit is the appellant before me. There is a long history to this litigation. The plaintiff is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act. It is formed by the members of Athar family.who are Muslims. The administration of this society is governed by a scheme framed in a suit O.S.No. 63 of 1943 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge.Coimba-tore.The scheme was modified by this Court in A.S. No. 222 of 1948. It is seen from the provisions of the scheme that the membership of the society is limited to all til ale persons born in the Athar Family or having marriage connection in the Athar Family.or who have for generations past accepted the principles of the Athar Jamath.or the person and descendants of persons who have signed the Ekrarnama of 1920. It is made clear that only persons who have attained the age of majority can become members. The object of the society are set out in Clause 4 of the scheme and they are as follows:To m...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »