Chennai Court February 1990 Judgments
The Idol of Sri Kannika Parameswari Amman and Others Vs. the Education ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-1990
Reported in: AIR1990Mad337
ORDERK. M. Natarajan, J. 1. This letters patent appeal is directed by the appellant-plaintiffs against the judgment and decree passed by the learned single Judge of this Court in A. S. No. 632 of 1979 allowing the appeal and setting aside the decree of the sub-Court, Tiruchirapalli in O.S. No. 603 of 1975. For the sake of convenience, the appellants herein are referred to as the plaintiffs and the respondents herein are referred to as the defendants.The facts which are necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be briefly stated as follows:-- The plaintiffs alleged that the first plaintiff is a religious institution managed exclusively by Arya Visya Community of Tiruchirapalli. The suit property belongs to the first plaintiff-temple. The first defendant, Educational Trustee Co. Ltd., is running its daily establishment, a daily newspaper publication called 'Dinathanthi'. The first defendant became a tenant in respect of the suit property on a monthly rent of Rs. 60/- and the second d...
Tag this Judgment!In the Matter of Suresh and Kuman Singh, the State Vs. Ramesh and Sure ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ859
Sivasubramaniam, J. 1. Referred Trial No. 9 of 1989 is coming before us for confirmation of the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Madras, under S. 366 of the Criminal Procedure Code in S.C. No. 133 of 1988. C.A. No. 782 of 1989 is the appeal by the second accused while C.A. No. 783 of 1989 is the appeal preferred by the third accused in the said case. C.A. No. 1104 of 1989 is the appeal by the State against the acquittal of A-1 and A-2 for an offence under S. 120B read with S. 302, I.P.C. 2. The accused were tried by the learned Sessions Judge on four charges. A-1 and A-2 were charged for an offence punishable under S. 120B read with S. 302 of the Penal Code for having conspired together to commit the murder of one Kamala Devi, wife of A-1. A-2 and A-3 were further charged for an offence under S. 302 read with S. 34 of the Penal Code for having committed the murder of the deceased Kamala Devi along with P.W. 1, the approver Boparam in furth...
Tag this Judgment!Mohamad Ibrahim and Another Vs. State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ1385
ORDER1. The accused 2 and 3 against whom and three others, the respondent has filed a charge-sheet under Clauses 7(2) and 7(3) of the Tamil Nadu Scheduled Commodities (Regulation of Distribution by Card system) order, 1982 read with Sections 3 and 7 read with S. 10 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 read with Sections 34 and 107 I.P.C. invoke the inherent powers of this court under section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the above proceedings. 2. Thiru K. S. Ramachandran, learned counsel for the petitioners would urge that there are no materials in the records furnished under Section 173 Cr.P.C. to show that the petitioners have committed the offences and the bald statement in the charge sheet that the offences could not have been committed without the knowledge and connivance of the petitioners, would not be sufficient to prove the case against the petitioners. The learned counsel would further contend that the petitioners holding the post of President and Secretary respectively in the first...
Tag this Judgment!M. Poongodi Vs. the Director of Medical Education and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-1990
Reported in: (1990)1MLJ430
ORDERSrinivasan, J.1. The petitioner has come forward with this writ petition for the issue of a certiorarified mandamus connection with the order of the second respondent in Ref.No. 3482/N/89 dated 19-4-1989 and the consequential order of the first respondent in L.Dis.No. 93374/PME/IP89 dated 26-9-1989, and for a further direction to the 1st respondent to permit the petitioner to join the Second Year training for the Academic year 1989-90, and issue such further or other decisions.2. The Petitioner was selected and posted under the 2nd respondent in the Government Kasturba Gandhi Hospital for the course of Nursing Training in 1987-88 Batch. She joined the Course on 1-12-1987. She passed the examination conducted at the end of 12 months period and normally she should have joined the second year training. But, according to her, she fell ill during the annual leave between 1-12-1988 and 31-12-1988, and she could not go to work. According to her affidavit, she worked upto 9-12-1988 and av...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer Vs. K. P. A. T. Rajamony Nadar.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-1990
Reported in: [1990]33ITD172(Mad)
ORDERPer D. S. Meenakshisundaram, Judicial Member - This is an appeal by the revenue objecting to the order of the Dy. Commissioner (Appeals) holding that the gift of the assessees right to share 80% of the profits of the business was completely exempt under section 5(1) (xiv) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958.2. This appeal arises out of the gift-tax assessment made on the late Rajamony Nadar, by his legal representative Shri R. Karunakaran. Shri Rajamony Nadar was the sole proprietor of the business carried on by him under the name and style of Shenbagam Match Works at Sivakasi. With effect from 1-4-1978, he entered into a partnership with his two sons and two daughters-in-law and in this partnership he had a 20% share. According to the Gift-tax Officer, the assessee Rajamony Nadar had relinquished his right to 80% of the profits of the business in favour of his two sons and two daughters-in-law, which amounted to a deemed gift, which was liable to gift-tax under the Gift-tax Act. He determi...
Tag this Judgment!S. Subramaniam Vs. Regional Transport Officer, and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-06-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Mad136
ORDER1. The prayer in the writ petition is for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to issue the fitness ceriificate for the lorry bearing registration number MDT 3921 and also to return the lorry along with the registration certificate to the petitioner.2. The petitioner claims that he and one Santhana Nariappan are the sons of one Sankarapandian Chettiar whose widow is the second respondent herein, and after the death of their father on 17-5-1987, the petitioner's younger brother gave a complaint to the police and at the instance of the S. I. of Police, Sankarankovil, the petitioner was threatened and compelled to enter into an arrangement on 18-3-1988 in the presence of panchayatdars. Under the said arrangement, two lorries bearing registration numbers MDT 3921 and TMU 1893 were given to the petitioner for enjoyment till a partition was effected in the family. According to the petitioner, since then he has been in enjoyment of these two lorries. Subsequentl...
Tag this Judgment!A.Y. Nasser Vs. State by D.S.P. of C.B.i. - S.C.B., Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-05-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ592
ORDER1. This petition has been riled under section 438, Cr.P.C. for the release of the petitioner on bail, in the event of his arrest in R.C. No. 19 of 1987 on the file of C.B.I. - S.C.B., Madras, in the interests of justice. 2. The averments in the petition, seeking bail, in the event of arrest, are as follows : The, petitioner, A, Y. Nasser, is the son of late A. R. Ahmed Yaseen who was a reputed businessmen at Madras and was the Chairman and the Managing Director of about five private limited Companies. After the death of A. M. Ahmed Yaseen on 4-7-1987. The petitioner succeeded him as the Chairman and the Managing Director of all the Companies. Till the death of his father, the petitioner was taking part only in the activities of Jet Wings Travels (I) Ltd., and not in the other Companies. According to the petitioner, in the last week of December, 1989, while he was in Hongkong in connection with his business activities, he was informed by the family members that the D.S.P. of CBI, h...
Tag this Judgment!Sir M. Ct. Muthiah Chettiar Family Trust Vs. Income-tax Officer.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-05-1990
Reported in: [1990]33ITD294(Mad)
ORDERPer Shri T. V. Rajagopala Rao, Judicial Member - This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the revisionary order, dated 20-11-1986 pass by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Tamilnadu-III, Madras. The assessee is Sir M. Ct. Muthiah Chettair Family Trust. This trust appears to have come into existence under the terms of the trust deed dated 15-2-1945. Admittedly the assessee is a public charitable trust, as its objects are intended to serve wholly religious or charitable purposes. The assessee trust did not apply 75% of its income for charitable or religious purposes, but had sought permission from the Income-tax Officer to accumulate for the assessment years 1972-73 to 1981-82. There was a meeting of Board of Trustees of the assessee trust on 27-6-1972 and a copy of the proceedings of the meeting dated 27-6-1972 at 11 a. m. is give to us. As per the proceedings we understand that there were only two members in the board of trustees, viz., (i) Shri M. Ct. Muthaiah and (ii) Shri ...
Tag this Judgment!V. Pechianna thevar and Etc. Vs. the Kulalar Pillaiyar Temple, Tiruppu ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-02-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Mad241
1. The defendants in the four suits are the appellants in all these four appeals. The plaintiff is common i.e., Kulalar Piliayar Temple bu its Managing Trustee R. Kandasamy. The defendant in each of the suits is a tenant of the plaintiff. These Second appeals arise out of the four suits filed by the plaintiff against the defendant in each of the suits for eviction, recovery of arrears of rent and future rent. As regards the question of arrears of rent the suit was subsequently withdrawn as the arrears of rent had been deposited into Court to the credit of the plaintiff. Therefore the only question of eviction of the defendant is surviving.2. The defendants seem to have filed petitions under S. 9 of the City Tenants Protection Act and those Petitions have been dismissed. As against that no appeal has been preferred.3. The trial Court (District Munsif, Tiruppur) decreed the suits for eviction and future rent with costs. As regards the arrears of rent it dismissed the suits as withdrawn b...
Tag this Judgment!Indian Overseas Bank Vs. Bank of Madura Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-02-1990
Reported in: [1992]75CompCas481(Mad)
Bellie, J. 1. The defendant, Indian Overseas Bank (represented by its chairman) 151, Mount Road, Madras-2, is the appellant against whom the suit claim for money has been decreed. 2. The plaintiff, Bank of Madura Limited, represented by its manager of its Godown Street branch has filed the suit on the allegations that on October 1, 1974, the plaintiff's branch at Avenue Road, Bangalore-2, issued a demand draft, bearing No. 660529/3442/74 for Rs. 26 in favour of one A.K. Traders payable at the plaintiff's branch at Shevpet, Salem, at the instance of one Raju of Chikpet, Bangalore-4. This demand draft has been fraudulently altered as if it is drawn in favour of one Masood Ahamed and payable at the plaintiff's branch at Godown Street, and amount payable is Rs. 12,605, and it has been presented for collection at the Sowcarpet branch of the defendant-bank. The said Sowcarpet branch of the defendant's bank has sent it for collection to the plaintiff's Godown Street branch and that branch has...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »