Chennai Court January 1992 Judgments
Employees State Insurance Corporation Vs. Oxford University Press
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-27-1992
Reported in: (1993)ILLJ760Mad
1. The respondent in E.I.O.P. No. 40 of 1983, before the Employees' Insurance Court (I Additional City Civil Court), Madras, has filed this civil miscellaneous appeal, against the order in the aforesaid E.I.O.P. No. 40 of 1983, filed under Section 75 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, allowing the petition for declaration that the provisions of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, are not applicable to the petitioner. 2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are : The respondent has filed the petition under Section 75 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, for declaration that the provisions of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, are not applicable to the petitioner on the following grounds : The petitioner is a department of Oxford University in the United Kingdom. It is part of Oxford University and a non-profit making institution. It has as its purpose the promotion of learning and research and propagation of knowledge by publishing educational and scholarly books...
Tag this Judgment!Pandyan Builders Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-27-1992
Reported in: (1993)45TTJ(Mad)524
ORDERS. KANNAN, A.M. :This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dt. 1st October, 1987 of the CIT(A)-I, Madras relating to the asst. yr. 1984-85.2. The assessee, a registered firm, imports and sells Outboard Motors. At the relevant point of time, it had a branch at Porbandar in the state of Gujarat. During the night of 29th/30th May, 1983 the Porbandar office was burgled and a sum of Rs. 10,75,500 stolen. When the burglary came to light, the official in charge of the Porbandar Branch lodged an FIR, with the Police Station at Udyogmandal, Porbandar. It is a matter of record that the FIR was lodged at 4.30 AM on 30th May, 1983. Acting on the said FIR the police moved in the matter, and seized from the alleged culprits a sum of Rs. 5,57,404.25, as also various articles & things of the aggregate value of Rs. 1,02,439. Thereupon, on the application made by the assessee, the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Porbandar on 20th September, 1983 ordered that the said sum of Rs. 5,...
Tag this Judgment!G. Raniammal Vs. Commissioner, Corporation of Madras and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-22-1992
Reported in: (1993)IILLJ132Mad
ORDER1. The writ petition is for the issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the proceedings of the 1st respondent in P.W.D.N. No. G3/3783/84 dt. September 26, 1990 and to direct the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's applications dated February 28, 1983 and January 20, 1984 and to provide any suitable job to the petitioner with the 1st respondent. 2. The petitioner is the wife of one Govindan, who died on May 13, 1977 while he was working as a watchman in Velachery Town Panchayat, after undergoing an operation under Family Planning Scheme. After the death of the petitioner's husband, the Velachery Town Panchayat has been merged with the 1st respondent Corporation with effect from June 1, 1978. The petitioner submitted an application on January 28, 1983 to the 1st respondent seeking suitable appointment for herself on compassionate ground. At that time she was aged 26 years. Again the petitioner made another application for suitable appointment and January 20, 1984...
Tag this Judgment!Venkataswami Motor Service Vs. C.K. Chinnaswamy and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-22-1992
Reported in: 1993ACJ1
P.S. Mishra, J.1. The third respondent, owner of a motor vehicle in M.C.O.P. No. 14 of 1980 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Coimbatore and appellant in A.A.O. No. 678 of 1981 has preferred this appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent of this Court against the award of compensation to the claimant-respondent Nos. 1 to 4 herein amounting to Rs. 36,000/- out of which Rs. 5,000/- is payable by the insurer and the balance by the owner-appellant.2. The claimants who are the husband and minor sons and daughters of the victim Kamalam moved the Tribunal under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (since repealed) alleging that Kamalam was traveling in a town bus plying in route No. 32-C and bearing registration No. TNE 6517 along Goods Shed Road on 16.7.1979 at about 7.45 a.m. When the said bus approached the bus stop near the junction of Big Bazaar Street and Goods Shed Road, west of St. Michael's High School, she got down from the bus at that stop, but before she coul...
Tag this Judgment!Philip Jeyasingh Vs. the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-22-1992
Reported in: (1992)2MLJ309
ORDERSrinivasan, J.1. The question referred to us is:Can the judgment of the Full Bench in R.Tamilarasan v. Director of Handlooms and Textiles : (1989)ILLJ588Mad , be characterised as one per incuriam or 'obiter dicta', as opined by the Division Bench of this Court in A.Natarajan v. Registrar of Co-operative Societies : (1991)IILLJ296Mad II. Full Benches.2. This is the first time in the long history of this Court, the judgment of a Full Bench is thrown over-board with the label per incuriam and brushed aside as 'obiter dicta' by a Division Bench. It is common knowledge that Full Benches are constituted specially for deciding specific questions referred to them. The judgment of the Full Bench is binding precedent as it expresses the collective opinion of the Court as such. It is binding on a single Judge as well as a Division Bench until it is reversed by a higher court. Mere expression of dissatisfaction by their Lordships of the Privy Council about the principles decided by a Full Ben...
Tag this Judgment!K. Appa Rao (Decd.) and Others Vs. State Bank of Hyderabad
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-21-1992
Reported in: [1996]85CompCas776(Mad); (1992)IIMLJ15
1. A suit filed on behalf of the plaintiff/respondent has been decreed for a sum of Rs. 1,33,474.30 together with interest at 16 1/2 per cent. per annum on the sum of Rs. 91,350 from the date of the suit till the date of the realisation, for creating a charge for the decretal sum on the pledged goods detailed in the pledge delivery letter executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff/respondent and for directing the stocks to be sold and proceeds credited towards decree and for costs of suit. 2. The defendant/appellant was carrying on the business of export of granite, marble and other stones and minerals and different types of wood and timber to various countries and was maintaining an account with the plaintiff/respondent. In the year 1973, he sought for loan facility from the plaintiff-bank in relation to his export trade to enable him to purchase necessary materials for the purpose of export against existing or anticipated orders. The plaintiff/respondent initially sanctione...
Tag this Judgment!P.V. Bakthavatchalam Vs. Govt. of India and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-21-1992
Reported in: 1992CriLJ2696
Arunachalam, J.1. All these writ petitions are disposed of together by a common order since the petitioner is the same, though the detenus are different, and the point raised is identical. Further all the detenus are stated to be involved in the same transaction, which led to the passing of the various impugned orders of detention, sought to be quashed in these writ petitions. 2. All these writ petitions have been filed for the issue of 'habeas' for the production of the detenus Arumugam, Selvam, P. V. Ramanujam, Thanu, Dhandapani and Ramu alias Ramamoorthy, before this Court to be set free, after quashing the impugned orders of detention passed against each one of them u/S. 3(2) of the National Security Act (Central Act 65/1980) by the third respondent, on 17-9-1991, with a view to preventing them from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. 3. The brief facts which led to the passing of the impugned orders of detention will have to be stated. The detenus ...
Tag this Judgment!Sampath, and Others Vs. State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-21-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2468
K.M. Natarajan, J. 1. This appeal is filed by the accused 1 to 4 in SC 23 of 1985 on the file of the learned Session Judge, Periyar at Erode, challenging the legality and correctness of the respective conviction and sentence, viz., conviction of accused 1 and 4 under S. 302 read with Section. 34, IPC (two counts) and sentence of imprisonment for life for each count and under S. 324, IPC no separate sentence was awarded, while the 2nd accused under S. 324, IPC (two counts) and under S. 326, IPC to undergo R.I. for one year under each count for 324 and under section 326 to undergo R.I. for 3 years, while A-3 was convicted under S. 323 and sentenced to undergo R.I. for six months; the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 2. These appellants were tried for four charges on the allegation that all the four accused on 17-8-1984 at about 5 p.m. on the cart track leading to Minnakkattupalyam Village, in pursuance of a common intention caused the murder of the deceased Chenniappa Gounder...
Tag this Judgment!R.N. Bajaj Vs. K. Govindan, Income-tax Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-21-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2317; [1992]198ITR447(Mad)
Pratap Singh, J. 1. Accused No. 3 in E.O.C.C. Nos. 659 to 662 of 1988 on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Economic Offences No. I), Egmore, Madras, has filed these petitions under section 482, Criminal Procedure Code, praying to call for the records in the aforesaid cases quash the same. 2. In E.O.C.C. No. 659 of 1988, the respondent has filed the complaint against the petitioner and four others under section 120B, 34, 193, 196 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and section 276C, 277 and 278B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The allegations in it are briefly as follows : The complainant is a public servant and he is authorised to file the complaint. It is also filed at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, within the meaning of section 279 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (which I shall hereafter refer to as 'the Act'). This complaint is in respect of the assessment year 1976-77, the accounting year being the year ending March 31, 1976. The first accused is a pa...
Tag this Judgment!industrial Rubber Products Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-21-1992
Reported in: (1992)102CTR(Mad)137; [1992]194ITR141(Mad)
Bakthavatsalam, J.1. The petitioner challenges the order of the second respondent passed in revision under section 264 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The petitioner is an assessee before the second respondent. For the assessment year 1986-87, the return had to be filed on or before June 30, 1986. The petitioner requested for extension of time till September 30, 1986, and again till October 31, 1986, and filed a return claiming carry forward of loss of Rs. 4,39,469 on October 31, 1986. According to the averments in the affidavit, this return has been filed within the extended time asked for, i.e., October 31, 1986. However, the second respondent informed the petitioner that the return filed is a belated one and it is lodged under section 139(10) of the Act. The petitioner invited the attention of the second respondent to section 139(3) as it stood prior to its amendment by the Taxation Laws (Amendment and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1986, and ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »