Chennai Court November 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.
Jayakar Fire Works and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-02-1990
Reported in: 1993(44)ECC165
A.S. Anand, C.J.1. The doctrine of promissory estoppel was pressed into aid by the appellants to obtain subsidy at 15% in pursuance of the Central Investment Subsidy Scheme by filing Writ Petition Nos. 11221 and 11222 of 1989. Both the writ petitions came to be dismissed by a learned single Judge by a common order dated 30.8.1990. Writ Appeal Nos. 1075 and 1076 of 1990 have been filed and both the writ appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment since it is conceded that identical questions of law and fact arise in both the cases.2. It transpires from a perusal of the records in both the writ petitions that the first respondent published a scheme called Central Investment Subsidy Scheme. The appellants registered themselves with a view to claim the subsidy under the scheme. The appellants filed applications for grant of subsidy after having set up the unit by making huge investments, but the third respondent informed the appellants that they were not eligible for the grant of...
Periasami Gounder (Died) and ors. Vs. Chinnaraj Gounder and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-02-1990
Reported in: (1991)22MLJ1
Srinivasan, J.1. The second appeal is at the instance of defendants 3 and 4 in a suit for specific performance and injunction filed by the first respondent herein.2. The case of first respondent (plaintiff) is that the suit property was sold originally by the father of defendants 1 and 2 to his father in 1933 for a sum of Rs. 500 and since then, it has been in the possession of his father and later himself. According to him, as defendants 1 and 2 were trying to disturb his possession he entered into an agreement in 1961 with the first defendant for purchasing the property for a sum of Rs. 4,000 and peace prevailed for some time thereafter. Again, defendants 1 and 2 started giving troubles which led to another agreement for sale in favour of the plaintiff by defendants 1 and 2 under Ex. A. 1 dated 1.1.1974. At that time the consideration was fixed at Rs. 5,000 and a sum of Rs. 500 was paid in advance. It is the case of the plaintiff that on 3.11.1974 a sale deed was executed on stamp pa...
P.T. Doraiswamy Vs. F. Manoharlal and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-02-1990
Reported in: (1991)298MLJ1
ORDERSrinivasan, J.1. The revision petition is against the order dismissing an application filed by the petitioner herein to discharge the summons issued to him for examining him as a witness. The short facts are as follows: The petitioner was appearing as counsel for the first respondent herein in certain proceedings. One of such proceedings was O.S. No. 1584 of 1979. That was a suit filed by the first respondent for an injunction against his brother. There were three other suits between the first respondent and his brother the second respondent and there were other parties also involved in those disputes. It is not necessary for the purpose of this case to set out the details of those cases. Ultimately, all the matters were referred to arbitration by a joint memo filed in the Court. The arbitrators passed an award and the award was filed in Court on 30.10.1984. On the basis of the award a decree was passed in one of the suits viz., O.S. No. 441 of 1981. The award itself directed the ...
State of Tamil Nadu Vs. C.H. Simpson
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-01-1990
Reported in: [1992]197ITR237(Mad)
Mishra, J.1. Heard. A sum of Rs. 700 was claimed as legal expenses The respondent assessee had to suffer to ordeal of a protracted proceeding until finally the claim that the said sum should be exempted from the agricultural income-tax has been upheld by the Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The State, however, has not left the matter at that. It has come to this court. 2. The Revenue's case has been noticed by the Tribunal in these words : Jayanarayan Singh Deo file return for the assessment year 1982-83 also. '... The Revenue's case is that the legal expenses have been claimed towards the properties already sold by the appellant and hence it is not an expense... incurred for deriving agricultural income.' 3. The Tribunal has noticed the contention of the assessee thus : Learned counsel contended that there was obstruction from the Government while cultivating the lands and he had to file a suit in the civil court to remove the obstruction for the peaceful enjoyment of the p...
T.N. Sivaraj Rahim Sakshi Fakhir Sahib Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-01-1990
Reported in: [1991]190ITR393(Mad)
Mishra, J.1. In these two tax cases, common contentions are raised and, accordingly, they are disposed of together. It appears that a statutory notice under the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Act (for short the 'Act') under section 16(2) was issued to the petitioner but he failed to respond. The Agricultural Income-tax Officer, accordingly, proceeded to levy tax on the basis of judgment assessment and also decided to impose penalty under section 20(2) of the Act. When a notice issued under section 20(3) of the Act, however, was received by the petitioner, he appeared with a petition paying for recall of the best judgment assessment on the ground, inter alia, that his Karwari was under eye medical treatment and, therefore, the return of income was not filed within time. The said application found favour with the taxing officer, who recorded as follows : 'In the absence of the karwari who was managing the lands, the contention of the assessee that he was unable to prepare the return ...
Rajarathinam Fire Works Vs. Superintendent of C. Ex.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-01-1990
Reported in: 1993(44)ECC259; 1991(52)ELT8(Mad)
Nainar Sundaram, J.Writ Petition Nos. 9535, 9536, 9537, 9553, 9657 and 9605 of 1987 : 1. The controversy in this batch of Writ Petitions is as to whether the petitioners are entitled to total exemption of levy of excise duty on fire works manufactured by them until the Notification of exemption was withdrawn. The petitioners faced orders of detention of the goods manufactured on the ground that there had been user of power in the manufacturing process, and they came to this Court to quash the orders of detention and for the consequential relief of total exemption from levy of excise duty on the goods manufactured by them during the period of exemption, or for passing orders on the show causes issued considering their replies sent. 2. There having been no stay with reference to the investigation into the question, by the departmental authorities, that has been completed and the result of the investigation is that further proceedings have been dropped since there is no evidence to proved...
Saradha and anr. Vs. Swarnambiga Finance Corporation
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-01-1990
Reported in: (1991)387MLJ1
Mishra, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellants and learned Counsel for the caveator/respondent.2. Under the impugned order, P.K. Sethurman, J. has ordered for the appointment of a receiver to take charge of the property in dispute, collect rent from the tenants, who were respondents 10 to 18 before him as also from respondents 1 to 7 in the suit C.S. No. 490 of 1989-and deposit the same into court, with a further direction to submit accounts once in three months in respect of the collection of rents. It is not in dispute that the first defendant in the suit, Devaki Ammal, was the owner and in possession and enjoyment of the suit property until she created mortgages in the year 1987. The mortgagees pressed for repayment and threatened to bring the property for sale. The first defendant approached one Bhairavi Finance Corporation for a loan of Rs. 4 lakhs on the security of the property, and accordingly, on 26.2.1987, the first defendant along with defendants 2 to 7 executed a sim...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›