Chennai Court October 1990 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.
Selvan and Others Etc. Vs. the State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-10-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ1942
1. Criminal Appeal Nos. 194 to 197/85 are filed by the respective accused in STC Nos. 52 to 55/84. Criminal Appeal Nos. 838 to 841 of 1986 are filed by private parties/owners of respective lorry and paddy which were directed to be confiscated in STC No. 52 to 55/84 respectively by the learned Special Judge under Essential Commodities Act, Thanjavur. 2. The accused in all the above said STC Nos. 52 to 55 of 1984 were charged under Clause 3(IA) of the Tamil Nadu Paddy (Restriction on Movement) Order, 1982 and also under O.4(1) of Tamil Nadu Essential Trade Articles (Regulation of Trade) Order, 1974 punishable under S. 7(1)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The accused in the above cases, as per the case of the prosecution had purchased paddy without a valid permit and also attempted to remove the paddy in the respective lorries TMS 8244, TNO 6275, TNQ 2638 and TMP 1708 from Thanjavur District limits to Pudukotai District violating the Notification, as the paddy should not be pr...
N.K. Mohnot Vs. State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-10-1990
Reported in: [1992]196ITR767(Mad)
Mrs. Padmini Jesudurai, J.1. This application has been filed by the accused who is said to be an income-tax practitioner for return of the documents mentioned in the petition which had been seized from his premises on a raid conducted by the respondent and the Income-tax Department. The learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent objects to the return of the documents on the ground that they are needed for investigation into certain cases in which they have not yet filed chargesheet. The learned standing counsel for the Income-tax Department also objects to the return of the documents on the ground that they are necessary for the assessment to detect and establish concealment of income and that those assessment proceedings are still pending. These two objections are valid. This petition is, therefore, dismissed, giving liberty to the petitioner to renew the application at a later stage, when the assessment proceedings are concluded and investigation into other cases is also over. ...
Narayana Prasad Gupta Vs. S. Senthamarai Kannan, Eighth Ito
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-10-1990
Reported in: [1992]196ITR587(Mad)
Arunachalam, J.1. The petitioner is the sole accused in C. C. No. 264 of 1983, pending on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, E. O. I., Egmore, Madras. On a private complaint preferred before the trial Magistrate by the respondent who is the VIII Income-tax Officer, City Circle III, Madras, the petitioner is being prosecuted for the alleged commission of offences punishable under sections 193, 196 and 420 read with section 511 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 276C and 277 of the Income-tax Act.2. The prosecution case is that the petitioner, with a view to evade income-tax and to defraud the exchequer of its legitimate revenues and to mislead and deceive the Income-tax Officer, committed the aforestated offences punishable under the Penal Code and the Income-tax Act. The purchase register, sales register, cash book and ledger, two certified true copies of purchase bills and a copy of a sale bill, are stated to have been fabricated. 3. In this petition filed un...
S. Kanagaraj and Etc. Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-09-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Mad182
ORDER1.The abovementioned batch of writ petitions have been filed by certain transport operators in Tamil Nadu for (a) issue of a Writ of Certiorari to quash G.O.Ms. No. 1794 Home (Transport-D) Department dated 6-8-1990 and for a Mandamus restraining the respondents from implementing the said G.O.Ms. No. 1794 Home (Transport-D) Department dated 6-8-1990 or in any other manner interfering with the plying of the vehicles of the petitioners concerned (relating to W.Ps. Nos. 13990, 13997, 14006, 14012, 14015, 14040, 14044, 14057, 14059, 14088 and 14409 of 1990). (b) issue of a writ of Declaration/ Mandamus to declare that the L. A. Bill 42/87 passed by the Legislative Assembly of Tamil Nadu has become a law in force on the day when it received the assent of the President of India in March, 1989 (relating to W.P. Nos. 13991, 13996, 14007, 14013, 14014, 14039, 14043 and 14087 of 1990). (c) issue of a writ of Mandamus directing the Government of Tamil Nadu to forthwith publish in the Tamil Na...
Bhuvaneswari and Another Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-09-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ2961
Bellie, J. 1. These two writ petitions have been filed for issue of writ of habeas corpus for releasing two persons viz., One Raghuraman and One Sundararajan two brothers who have been detained under the provisions of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, hereinafter referred to as COFEPOSA Act. Writ Petition No. 787 of 1990 is by Bhuvaneswari, wife of the said Raghuraman and Writ Petition No. 791 of 1990 is by Perumayeeammal, mother of the said Sundararajan. 2. The facts are (assign from the grounds of detention) : On 18-8-1989, on information, the Customs Officers attached to C.I.U., Tiruchy searched the residential premises of the detenu Sundararajan at No. 6/287, L.I.C. Colony, Alagapuram, Salem-4. The Officers found one plastic wire bag containing 64 gold bars with foreign markings which totally weighed 7115 grams with 24 carat purity valued at Rs. 22,69,000/-. Sundararajan had no import licence or any other document to prove that t...
A. Harikrishnan Vs. the Registrar and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-09-1990
Reported in: [1991]192ITR391(Mad)
Govindasamy, J. 1. The petitioner has filed the above writ petition for issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the order dated February 15, 1989, in Application No. 686 of 1989 in Execution Petition No. 73 of 1981 on the file of the High Court, Madras, in C.S. No. 1291 of 1981 on the file of the High Court of Bombay, pending before the official referee in so far as it relates to the sale of immovable property by auction as it contravances the provisions of section 269UC and sub-section (2) of section 269UL of Chapter XX-C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and to quash the same. 2. The second respondent instituted a suit, C.S. No. 1291 of 1981 on the file of the High Court of Bombay against one A. B. Ananthakrishnan, the father of the petitioner herein, for a sum of Rs. 7.40 lakhs and obtained a decree on September 7,1981. For the purpose of execution of the said decree, the decree was transferred to the High Court at Madras a...
A. Shanmuga Sundara Pandia Nadar and anr. Vs. P.S.R. Vivekanandan and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-09-1990
Reported in: (1991)105MLJ1
ORDERSrinivasan, J.1. This Revision Petition is against an order passed by the Principal District Judge, Tirunelveli in I.A. No. 516 of 1990 in O.S. No. 33 of 1988. The application was filed by the petitioners herein for a declaration that the election of 34 members to the Administrative council of the third respondent Sangam as per the interim report of the Commissioner dated 19-3-1990 and the election of Office Bearers on 30-3-1990 were null and void and for an order declaring that the petitioners were entitled to discharge the duties of the President and Secretary of the Sangam respectively.2. The third respondent Sangam is a registered society under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act. The administration of the Sangam is governed by a scheme framed in O.S. No. 13 of 1942 on the file of Sub Court, Tirunelveli which came into force on 1-9-1943. Admittedly, the Sangam is having about 50,000 members as on date. The members of the Sangam are persons aged above 18 and belonging to ...
Jay Frozen Foods and Others Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-1990
Reported in: [1992]196ITR724(Mad)
Padmini Jesudurai, J.1. The petitioners who has been convicted by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Economic Offences I) Egmore, Madras, in E. O. C. C. No. 629 of 1983 for offences under section 120B, 193, 196, 420, 467 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and section 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment and fine, which conviction have been confirmed in C. A. No. 328 of 1984 by the Principle Sessions Judge, Madras, with slight modification in the sentence relating to petitioners Nos. 2, 4 and 5, have filed the present revision challenging the convictions and sentences. 2. The gravamen of the charge against the petitioners was that, though the third petitioner was not really a partner of the first petitioner-firm from April 1, 1977, onwards, all the petitioners conspired together for the purposed of getting the income-tax of the first petitioner assessed at a lower rate and made it appear as if the their petitioner continued to b...
Hardie Trading Limited and anr. Vs. Addisons Paints and Chemicals Ltd. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-1990
Reported in: (1991)218MLJ1
Janarthanam, J.1. Messrs. Hardie Trading Limited, for short 'Hardie', is a foreign company having its registered office at No. 594 St. Kilda Road, Melbourne, Australia. Hardie is the registered owner of the trade mark SPARTAN and Warrior device, it having been registered on 18.6.1926 in Australia and on 6.8.1928 in Newzealand. Hardie registered the trade mark SPARTAN in India on 21.5.1946 under 122172 in Class 2, and on 25.5,1946 under 122173 in Class 3, and the trade mark SPARTAN VELOX on 25.5.1946 under 122174 in Class 2.2. Messrs. Addisons Paints and Chemicals Limited, Huzur Gardens, Sembiam, Madras 11, for short 'Addison', was the selling agent of Hardie in India for the products under the SPARTAN trade mark from 1946 to 1949. In 1948 Addison commenced manufacture of its products under the supervision, technical know how and quality control of Hardie and until July, 1963, used the SPARTAN trade mark on its products all licencee of Hardie and from August, 1963 till the end of August...
P.S.S. Sathappan Vs. Andhra Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-1990
Reported in: (1991)2MLJ9
ORDERSrinivasan, J.1. The appeal was in the list for final hearing on 21.4.1988 and learned Counsel who was on record at that time reported no instructions; the party's name was called and the appellant did not appear. Hence, the appeal was dismissed on that date.2. C.M.P. No. 9919 of 1990 has been filed for set. ting aside the order of dismissal dated 21.4.1988. It is stated in the affidavit that at the time when the appeal was filed M/s. M.N. Padmanabhan and R. Singaravelan had filed vakalath for the appellant and on 12.1.1987 they had given consent for change of vakalath. It is further stated that on 19.1.1987 a vakalath was filed by M/s. M. Shamdoss and Thulasidoss, Advocates, Madras. But, admittedly no application was filed for revocation of vakalath given already to M/s. M.N. Padmanabhan and R. Singaravelan. Under Order 2, Rule 4(3) of the Appellate Side Rules, the Registrar is empowered to order change of practitioners on application made on stamped petition. Though no petition ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »