Chennai Court June 1990 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. T.S. Srinivasa Iyer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-14-1990
Reported in: (1990)85CTR(Mad)175; [1991]192ITR50(Mad)
Thanikkachalam, J. 1. In compliance with the directions under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), in T.C. Nos. 433 of 1979 and 490 of 1977, the Tribunal referred the following questions to this court for our opinion. 2. Assessment year 1970-71 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the sum of Rs. 17,693 representing bad debts written off should be allowed as a proper deduction while computing the business income of the assessee-family for the assessment year 1970-71 ?' 3. Assessment year 1969-70 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the claim of the assessee of Rs. 21,682 representing rebate allowed to customers for laboratory charges and copy printing charges payable by them should be allowed as a proper deduction while computing the business income of the assessee-family for the assessment yea...
Tag this Judgment!V. Krishnamurthy Vs. the Chief Superintendent (Training) Power Enginee ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-14-1990
Reported in: (1991)177MLJ1
ORDERK.M. Natarajan, J.1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus or other appropriate orders calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the first respondent in No. NEY/ADM/5585 dated 9.8.1989 and quash the same.2. The case of the petitioner as disclosed from the affidavit can be briefly stated as follows: He was appointed as a peon in the Thermal Power Station, Personnel Training Institute, Neyveli, a Government of India organization, on 12.3.1974. Thereafter on 27.12.1983 he was appointed as lower division clerk with effect from 31.12.1983 on ad hoc basis in and by the order of the first respondent dated 31.12.1983. Consequent on his appointment as lower division clerk his initial pay was fixed at Rs. 260 in the scale of pay of Rs. 260-6-290-EB-6-326-8-366-EB-8-390-10-400. Thereafter, a typewriting test was conducted on 14.10.1985 for the purpose of drawal of annual increment. He passe...
Tag this Judgment!Pownraj Vs. the Principal, Central Polytechnic
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-14-1990
Reported in: (1990)2MLJ441
Nainar Sundaram, J.1. The appellant is the petitioner in W.P.No.13210 of 1985. The respondent is the respondent in the writ petition. The parties shall be referred to in this judgment of ours by their nomenclature in the writ petition. The petitioner, who was functioning as a Garden Supervisor at the relevant point of time, has been sent out of service in disciplinary action. The petitioner was having the status of a Government servant The petitioner straightway came to this Court by way of the above writ petition, impugning the disciplinary action and the penalty imposed on him. Three points were urged before the learned single Judge, who heard the writ petition, as follows: (1) The finding of the- disciplinary authority is based on no evidence; (2) A copy of the report of the enquiry authority, which has exonerated the petitioner, was not furnished to the petitioner, before the disciplinary authority, differing from the enquiry authority, imposed the penalty. It must be noted here th...
Tag this Judgment!Duraiswami and ors. Vs. Swaminathan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-14-1990
Reported in: (1990)2MLJ480
K.M. Natarajan, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by defendants 4 to 8 who were unsuccessful before the courts below.The brief facts which are necessary for the disposal of this second appeal are as follows: Respondents 1 and 2, who are the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 67 of 1976 filed the said suit for a declaration of title and for recovery of possession. The case of the plaintiffs is that the first defendant, and late Chidambaram Padayachi are brothers and their (Plaintiffs) mother Bagyam is their sister. The second defendant, since died, is the wife of the first defendant Defendants 3 and 4 are the sons. Chidambaram Padayachi and the first defendant became divided in or about 1930. Items 6,8 and 14 of the plaint schedule properties were allotted to Chidambaram Padayachi in the oral partition. Subsequently out of the income from the said properties as well as the income from his commission trade in paddy and grams, Chidambaram Padayachi purchased various properties.2. The plaintiffs' fa...
Tag this Judgment!Raja Corporation and Others Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-13-1990
Reported in: [1992]194ITR487(Mad)
Arunachalam, J.1. In these petitions filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the prayer is to call for the records and to quash the proceedings pending against Messrs. Raja Corporation and others in C. C. Nos. 135 to 140 of 1986, on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Comibatore, as not maintainable. These prosecutions have been initiated under section 276C, section 276C read with sections 278B, 277, section 277 read with section 278B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and sections 193, 196 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. A survey under section 133A of the Income-tax Act was conducted and the accounts of Messrs. Raja Corporation for the years 1977-78 to 1982-83 were called for. The respondent who is the Income-tax Officer, circle-III(3), Coimbatore, found, on examination that there were mistakes in the gross totalling closing stock which was therefore, obviously, undervalued. The explanation of the firm was that the mistake had occurred admittedly due ...
Tag this Judgment!Nagarathinam Vs. Murugesan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-13-1990
Reported in: 1991ACJ673
V. Ratnam, J.1. This appeal, at the instance of the owner of the lorry bearing registration No. TDU 1536, is directed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chengalpattu in M.A.C.O.P. No. 459 of 1982 awarding a sum of Rs. 16,400/- as compensation to respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in respect of the death of their son Raman in an accident that took place on 20.7.1982 involving the lorry of the appellant2. According to the case of respondent Nos. 1 and 2, their son, deceased Raman, was sleeping under a tree near the petrol bunk in Tambararn Sanatorium on the night of 20.7.1982 and at that time, the lorry belonging to the appellant, which was driven negligently, ran over him and killed him and in respect of that, compensation in a sum of Rs. 50,000/-should be awarded to them. In the counter filed by the appellant, she contended that the lorry was parked in a corner as deceased Raman was sleeping under the tree and owing to the vibration caused by the passing traffic on the high...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. K. Subramaniam and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-13-1990
Reported in: II(1991)ACC520; 1991ACJ625
V. Ratnam, J.1. This appeal at the instance of United India Insurance Co. Ltd. is directed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (II Additional Sub Court), Chengalpattu, in M.O.P. No. 206 of 1981. The first respondent herein filed M.O.P. No. 206 of 1981 against the appellant and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 herein praying for the award of compensation in a sum of Rs. 17,040/- in respect of the injuries sustained by him in an accident that took place on 24.12.1980 involving a tempo bearing registration No. TMU 2154, which stood registered in the name of the second respondent herein and in respect of which the appellant had issued a policy of insurance in the name of the third respondent herein. Though several defences were raised by the appellant and respondent Nos. 2 and 3, having regard to the limited scope of the appeal in which the appellant insurance company seeks to disclaim its liability for the payment of a sum of Rs. 4,900/- determined as compensation payable by i...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Angammal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-13-1990
Reported in: II(1991)ACC386; 1991ACJ449
V. Ratnam, J.1. These appeals, at the instance of the United India Insurance Co. Ltd., have been preferred against the common award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge), Erode, in M.C.O.P. Nos. 120 and 114 of 1983 and 121 and 106 of 1982. On 25.2.1982, the bus bearing registration No. TNV 9698 belonging to K.O. Chinnasami (the second respondent in C.M.A. Nos. 479 and 482 of 1984, third respondent in C.M.A. No. 480 of 1984 and fourth respondent in C.M.A. No. 481 of 1984) driven by one Pongiannan, the husband of the first respondent in C.M.A. No. 480 of 1984 and father of the second respondent therein, met with an accident at Seemankuzhi, while it was proceeding from Coimbatore to Bannari and in that accident, the driver of the bus and some passengers died and other passengers received injuries. One Duraiswami, who was a passenger in the bus, died and his mother Angammal, the first respondent in C.M.A No. 479 of 1984, filed M.C.O.P. No. 120 of 1983 praying f...
Tag this Judgment!V.X. Joseph and ors. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-13-1990
Reported in: (1991)185MLJ1
Nainar Sundaram, J.1. Except one writ appeal, W.A. No. 842 of 1984, the other cases are writ petitions. The appellant in the writ appeal was the petitioner in W.P. No. 6674 of 1984. The petitioners in all the writ petitions including W.P. No. 6674 of 1984 out of which W.A. No. 842 of 1984 arises, are tenants within the meaning of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act 18 of 1960, hereinafter referred to as the Act. The tenants are facing proceedings under the Act, instituted against them by their landlords. They have come to this Court impeaching the prosecution of the proceedings before the Controllers under the Act, who are seized of them, and who in the instant cases, are the respective Judges of the Court of Small Causes, Madras.2. The decision in W.P. No. 6674 of 1984 has gone against the tenant/the petitioner therein. In W.P. No. 6674 of 1984 two contentions were raised before the learned Single Judge, who heard and disposed of the same and they are as follows:(1) ...
Tag this Judgment!Raja Paul David (Died) and ors. Vs. M. Thiagarajan (Died) and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-13-1990
Reported in: (1991)2MLJ55
K.M. Natarajan, J.1. The unsuccessful first defendant has preferred this appeal challenging the judgment and decree passed by II Additional Subordinate Judge, Salem in O.S. No. 567 of 1977. The brief facts which are necessary for the disposal of the appeal can be stated as follows : Respondents 1 and 2 herein, who are the plaintiffs before the trial Court have filed the suit to recover the purchase-money paid by the first plaintiff in respect of half of Riverdale Estate and also to create a charge on the suit property. For convenience sake, the array of parties before the trial Court is adopted in this appeal. The case of the plaintiffs is as follows: The estate called Riverdale Estate was owned by two sisters, Miss A.E.H. Short and Miss M.H. Short by virtue of the will executed by their father. As per the terms of the will, if one sister died the surviving sister should get the entire estate. Miss M.H. Short known as Mary became lunatic which necessitated the appointment of a manager ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »