Chennai Court October 1994 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.
The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. Jalaja and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-20-1994
Reported in: (1995)1MLJ252
Srinivasan, J.1. The Insurance Company is the appellant. The only question raised by the company is that the liability of the company is limited to Rs. 1,50,000. The total award is for Rs. 2,50,000 with interest. The company contended before the tribunal that according to the policy, the liability is limited to meet the requirements of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. It was argued that under the Act as it stood at the time of accident, the maximum liability of the Insurance Company was only Rs. 1,50,000 for third party risk. The Insurance Company also produced a true copy of the policy which was marked as Ex.B-1. An employee of the company in the rank of Assistant has produced the document and given evidence in support of it. The document was signed by the Branch Manager as true copy.2. The tribunal has chosen to reject the document and also the contention of the Insurance Company on the footing that the original policy has not been produced. The tribunal has observed that the Insurance ...
J. Veeraraghavan Vs. Lalith Kumar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-19-1994
Reported in: [1995]83CompCas853(Mad)
Janarthanam, J. 1. T.S. Arunachalam J., while hearing the arguments in this petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 489 of 1992 on the file of the XVth Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Madras, raising the question as to whether the return by a banker of a cheque unpaid bearing an endorsement 'account closed', will fail within the scope and ambit of the two contingencies, viz., 'insufficiency of the amount of money standing to the credit of the account of the person', or 'it exceeded the amount arranged to be paid from that account of a person by an agreement with that bank', giving rise to a cause of action for launching a prosecution by preference of a private complaint for an offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (Act 26 of 1881) (for short 'the Act'), came to notice divergent views emerging from two learned judges of this court, Pratap Singh J. and Padmini Jesudurai J. (a) In Binary Sys...
Veeraraghavan Vs. Lalith Kumar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-19-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ1882
Janarthanam, J.1. T.S. Arunachalam, J., while hearing the arguments in this petition under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 489 of 1992 on the file of the XV Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Madras, raising the question as to whether the return by a Banker of a cheque unpaid bearing an endorsement 'account closed', will fall within the scope and ambit of the two contingencies, viz., 'insufficiency of the amount of money standing to the credit of the account of the person', or, it exceeded the amount arranged to be paid from that account of a person by an agreement with that Bank', giving rise to a cause of action for launching a prosecution by preference of a private complaint for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (Act 26 of 1881) for short 'the Act'), came to notice divergent views emerging from two learned Judges of this Court, Pratap Singh, J. and Padmini Jesudurai, J. 2. (a) In Binary Systems (P) L...
State and Others Vs. E. Veeramani
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-19-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ184; 1995(1)CTC29
ORDER1. These petitions coming on for hearing on 23-8-94, 16-9-94, 17-9-94, 20-9-94, 7-10-94 and 11-10-94 upon perusing the petition and the respective affidavits filed in support thereof and the orders of this court dated 14-6-93 and 25-5-93 and made in Crl.OP Nos. 6271/93 and 6275/93 respectively and the counter affidavits filed therein and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. S. Shanmughavelayutham Addl. Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State, in all the petitions herein and of Mr. A. Natarajan Advocate for the respondent in all the petitions herein and this having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court made the following order : On 10-2-1993 the Inspector of Police, L & O R-7 K.K. Nagar Police Station registered a case against one Veeramani the respondent in all these three petitions in his Station crime No. 288/93 under sections 148, 341, 302 and 506(II) IPC read with Section 34, IPC on the complaint that at 8-45 a.m. on that day the said Veeramani and his associates...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indira Cotton Mills (P) Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-19-1994
Reported in: [1995]215ITR36(Mad)
Mishra, J.1. This reference under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), has brought before us a question 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the provisions of s. 40A(7) of the IT Act, 1961, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled to the deduction of Rs. 1,92,871 representing provision for gratuity relating to the asst. yr. 1972-73 and earlier years from the income of the asst. yr. 1973-74 ?' In course of the hearing, we have felt persuaded to modify the question and split it in two parts, but before we do so, we may take into consideration the statement of the case. 2. The assessee is a private limited company, its business being manufacture and sale of cotton yarn. For the asst. yr. 1973-74, it claimed that a sum of Rs. 2,23,224 be deducted from the assessable income in the asst. yr. 1973-74. The ITO disallowed the same on finding that a sum of Rs. 1,92,871 representing provision for g...
Miss Kathleen Prio Saldhanha and Others Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-19-1994
Reported in: [1995]215ITR34(Mad)
1. The assessees were the erstwhile partners of a partnership firm called 'Silver Cloud Coffee Estate'. The assessment year involved in these cases is 1982-83. The assessees are the applicants herein. The partnership firm, Silver Cloud Coffee Estate, was dissolved on August 28, 1981. Before the dissolution, the firm was filing its returns. After the dissolution, the erstwhile partners of the firm obtained their share from the firm in accordance with their profit-sharing ratio. Thereafter, they opted to compound tax under section 65 of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for their holdings held by them in the middle of the accounting year. The Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Gudalur, permitted the partners of the firm for composition of tax under section 65 of the Act for the assessment year 1982-83. However, by exercising the suo motu power under section 34 of the Act, the Commissioner after hearing the assessees came to the conclus...
E.i.D. Parry (India) Ltd. Vs. Regional Director, Tamil Nadu E.S.i. Cor ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-19-1994
Reported in: (1995)IILLJ1173Mad
ORDERJayasimhababu, J. 1. The order of the respondent made on 12.10.1984 under Section 45A of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) determinating the amount of the contributions payable by the petitioner in respect of its employees in the Head, Regional and Branch Offices for the period from 28.1.1968 to 15.1.1977 in the sum of Rs. 5,49,277.11 has been challenged by the employer in this writ petition. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that as the factories owned and run by it for the manufacture of ceramics products, fertilizers, marine products etc., are located at different places outside Madras and the company's Head Office, regional office and branch offices are all located in Madras and in order cities, the petitioner was under the impression that the Act was applicable only to the employees working in factories it was not necessary for the employer to cover its employees working in the head, regional and branch offices under the Act, and t...
C. Kailaschand JaIn and Two ors. Vs. Mohamed Kasim
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-19-1994
Reported in: 1995(1)CTC47
ORDERThangamani, J.1. Tenants who have lost in both the forums below have come forward with this civil revision petition. Present respondent instituted R.C.O.P. No. l0 of 1988 in the Court of Rent Controller (District Munsif), Mayiladuthurai seeking eviction under Sections 10(2)(ii)(b) and 10(2)(iii) of Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act 18 of 1960 on the allegations that the revision petitioners are using the building for a purpose other than that for which it was leased and that they have committed acts of waste as are likely to impair materially the value or utility of the building. It is the case of the landlord that the demised property' is the ground floor measuring 10'X95' of Door No. 5, Second street, Mayiladuthurai Town. This non-residential premises was let out to the revision petitioner under Ex.P. 1 agreement dated .31-7-1978 for the purpose of running Textile shop, Jewellery shop and Medical shop for a period of 15 years from 1-7-1978 on a monthly rent rangi...
Kishinchand Chellarams (India) (P) Limited and anr. Vs. G. Varadappa
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-19-1994
Reported in: (1995)1MLJ135
Thangamani, J.1. The review petitioners are tenants in R.C.O.P. No. 1208 of 1993 on the file of the Rent Controller-cum-XI Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras. The landlord came forward with that petition for fixation of fair rent of the demised premises. By his order dated 3.9.1990 learned Rent Controller fixed the fair rent at Rs. 8,350 per month with effect from 9.3.1983. Both the landlord and tenants preferred appeal against the said order. In R.C. A. No. 113 7 of 1990 the appellate authority by his order dated 14.12.1992 fixed the fair rent payable by the tenants at Rs. 13,080 per month. The tenants assailed the said order in C.R.P. No. 1125 of 1993 in this Court. Along with the revision petition the tenants came forward with C.M.P. No. 5500 of 1993 seeking stay of the operation of the order of appellate authority fixing the fair rent at Rs. 13,080 per month pending disposal of the civil revision petition. The landlord filed counter in the said application and it came up for hear...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. M.R. Subramanian and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-19-1994
Reported in: 1996ACJ1260
M. Srinivasan, J.1. When this appeal is taken up, a representation is made by learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 who is the claimant, that the Managing Partner of the respondent No. 2 firm is no more. According to him, he died one year back and he does not know the exact date of his death. It is not the case of any of the parties that the firm got dissolved on the death of the Managing Partner. No steps have been taken by any of the parties to bring any other person on record as representing the firm.2. The only contention raised by the appellant in the appeal is that the liability of the insurance company is limited to Rs. 5,000/- by the express terms in the policy which is marked as Exh. B-1. The relevant clause in the policy reads thus:In consideration of an additional premium and notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in Section II-I(c) but subject otherwise to the terms, exceptions, conditions and limitations of this policy the company will indemnify the insured ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »