Chennai Court March 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.
A. Jafferullah Vs. T. Stanes and Co. Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-16-1994
Reported in: [1994]80CompCas759(Mad)
Pratap Singh, J. 1. The accused in C.C. No. 356 of 1990, on the file of Judicial Magistrate No. III, Coimbatore, has filed this petition under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, praying to call for the record in the above case and quash the same. 2. The short facts are : The respondent has filed the private complaint against the petitioner for the offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (which I shall hereafter refer to as 'the Act'). The allegations in it are briefly as follows : 3. The complainant supplied goods to the accused on credit and as per the accounts maintained by the complainant, the accused owe to the complainant a sum of Rs. 1,11,465.45 as on March 31, 1990. Towards a portion of the said liability, the accused issued a cheque dated March 31, 1990, for Rs. 48,000 in favour of the complainant. The complainant presented the cheque for collection through his bankers. The cheque was dishonoured on the ground that it exceeds the arrangement. The ab...
S. Rajendran Vs. Revathy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-15-1994
Reported in: 1994CriLJ3017; II(1994)DMC448
ORDER1. The respondent in CMP No. 1100/92 on the file of Judicial Magistrate-1, Villupuram has filed this petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. to call for the records in the above case end to quash the same. 2. Short facts are : The respondent has filed a petition for maintenance against the petitioner under section 125 Cr.P.C. in MC. No. 232/85 on the file of Judicial Magistrate, Vilupuram. After enquiry, the learned Magistrate has passed an order awarding maintenance at the rate of Rs. 350/- per month. Subsequently, the respondent again filed MC. No. 12/92 on the file of Judicial Magistrate-I, Vilupuram, under Section 125 Cr.P.C. praying for maintenance at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month. On the allegation that since the order of maintenance passed in MC. No. 232/85, the respondent filed CMP No. 1100/92 to realise the arrears of maintenance during the pendency of that petition, the petitioner paid part of the amount and made an offer to live together and believing the promise she agree...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. P. Alwarsamy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-15-1994
Reported in: (1995)211CTR(Mad)353; [1995]217ITR353(Mad)
ORDERSomasundaram, J. 1. In these tax cases at the instance of both the assessee and the Revenue, the following common questions are referred to this court for decision : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the share of income of the assessee's spouse from the firm of Messrs. V. S. S. Subba Naicker and Company, could be added to the total income of the assessee when the share of income from the firm by reason of the assessee's membership in the firm was not assessed in his hands as an individual but included in the total income of the Hindu undivided family of which he was the karta? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the share of income attributable to the minor children of the assessee by reason of admission to the benefits of partnership in Messrs. V. S. S. Subba Naicker and Company could be aggregated under section 64(1)(iii) when the assessee had no income from any source with which such aggregation is possible?' 2. As far a...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. V.R.R.M. Ramaswamy Chettiar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-15-1994
Reported in: [1995]217ITR368(Mad)
A.R. Lakshmanan, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following questions of law were referred to this court for our opinion in the above two cases : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that share income of the assessee from the firm of Messrs. M. V. R. Kuantan, Malaysia, cannot be included in the assessment of the assessee? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that there was no permanent establishment in respect of the Malaysian firm in India within the meaning of article 7 of the double taxation avoidance agreement? 3. Whether in view of the provisions contained in paragraph 2 of the article 22 of the double taxation avoidance agreement and the employment of the term 'may' in the articles 6, 11, 12, etc., the Tribunal had not erred in the facts and circumstances of the case in having held that the Malaysian foreign income is not also includible in t...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Vr. S.R.M. Firm and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-15-1994
Reported in: (1994)120CTR(Mad)427; [1994]208ITR400(Mad)
Raju, J. 1. The taxability and computation of income of a resident of India in respect of the income derived from a foreign source is the subject-matter of a batch of tax reference cases pending on the file of this court. An adjudication of the issues raised depends upon the agreement entered into between the Government of India and the Government of Malaysia for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes of income published in Notification No. 1705/F. No. 11(43)/46-FTD dated July 1, 1977. Learned counsel appearing in some of the cases have selected a few of the representative cases which could be decided initially so that the other cases could be ultimately decided applying the ratio of these cases. Though the terms of reference in different cases vary, the core of the problem and the basic issues involved for adjudication are similar and identical and, consequently, these cases are taken up for consideration together. 2. Tax Case No. 2...
K.M. Abdul Hai and Sons and Others Vs. Alagarsamy, Income-tax Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-15-1994
Reported in: [1995]217ITR465(Mad)
Pratap Singh, J. 1. The accused in C.C. Nos. 31 to 34 of 1992 on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences), Madurai have filed these petitions under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records in the above cases and to quash the same. 2. The short facts are : In C.C. No. 31 of 1992, the respondent has filed a complaint against the petitioners for an offence punishable under section 276CC read with section 278B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The allegations in it are briefly as follows : 3. The first accused is a registered firm which comes under section 44AB of the Act. Accused Nos. 2 to 4 are the partners of the first accused firm and they are responsible for the business of the first accused firm. The first accused is an assessee to income-tax. For the assessment year 1985-86, the accused had to submit the return of income on or before July 31, 1985, as per section 139(1) of the Act. But the accused had not filed the return withi...
Shyam Investments and Another Vs. Appropriate Authority and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-13-1994
Reported in: [1995]213ITR82(Mad)
K.A. Swami, C.J.1. Writ Appeal No. 215 of 1994 is preferred against the order dated January 5, 1994, passed by the learned single judge in Writ Petition No. 14089 of 1986 (see page 84 supra). The learned single judge has held that the clarification contained in the judgment of the Supreme Court in C. B. Gautam v. Union of India : [1993]199ITR530(SC) , would make inapplicable the principles laid down in the said decision, therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, it has been dismissed. Hence, the petitioner therein has come up in appeal. 2. The facts necessary for the purpose of determining as to whether the view taken by the learned single judge is correct are as follows : The immovable property involved in the proceeding consists of land and building situate at 23, Padmavathiar Road, Royapettah, Madras. It consists of land measuring 3 grounds and 529 square feet and a building with a built up area of 3,000 square feet. The petitioner firm agreed to purchase ...
Gunasekaran Vs. Veerabadhran
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-11-1994
Reported in: [1995]84CompCas679(Mad)
Pratap Singh, J.1. The accused in C.C No. 161 of 1990 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Valliyur, has filed this petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to call for the records in the said case and to quash the same. 2. The short facts are : The respondent has filed a complaint against the accused for the offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The allegations in the complaint are briefly as follows : The accused is a friend of the complainant. On February 19, 1990, the complainant lent a sum of Rs. 20,000 to the accused. The accused agreed to repay the said amount within one month from the said date and issued a cheque in favour of the complainant. The accused failed to repay the loan within the agreed time. So, the complainant presented the cheque to Canara Bank for encashment. But the cheque was dishonoured for lack of funds and the complainant received a notice of dishonour on April 10, 1990. The complainant sent a notice...
K. Manoharan Vs. Dig of Police, Special Task Force Srimalai Matheswara ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-11-1994
Reported in: 1995(1)ALT(Cri)77; 1994CriLJ2591
Srinivasan, J.1. For over a decade by now, the Government of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu are at their wits' end in catching a notorious sandalwood smuggler by name Verappan, who appears to be ruling the roost as at present with his gang in the forests adjoining the two States. The two Governments are striving every nerve to nab him by spending huge amounts in their efforts but incurring heavy loss of men and money. It is said that he and his gang members have built up a fief of their own and been carrying on criminal and terrorist activities in their area. They have killed thousands of elephants and extracted the tusks for illicit sale and indulged in large scale looting of forest wealth, particularly sandalwood, teak wood and other valuable timber. The two governments have set up special task forces consisting of senior Police officials and others well known for their efficiency. There have been several encounters and pitched battles between the police forces on the one hand and the smug...
Gomathi Vs. Vijayaraghavan and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-11-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ81
ORDER1. The present petitioner is the complainant in C.C. No. 269 of 1983 in the Court of J.S.C.M. Chidambaram. The claims to be the legally wedded wife of first respondent Vijayaraghavan. Her complaint under section 494 I.P.C. is that during the subsistence of their marriage the first respondent married the second respondent as his second wife. Respondents 3 to 5 are the mother, sister and brother of the first respondent. They are charged under Section 494 read with Section 109 I.P.C. for abetment of the offence. The petitioner contends that during trial respondents 1 and 2 specifically pleaded that there was no marriage at all between them, that the second respondent was a virgin and that she never gave birth to any child. The case of the petitioner before the trial Court was that on 17-5-1984, a son by name Vijayababu was born to respondents 1 and 2. And she sought to prove the same by producing Ex. 3 which purports to be the Birth Extract of the child. The virginity of the second r...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »