Chennai Court August 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.
Marzook Rahman Vs. the Joint Secretary to Government of India, Ministr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-26-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ1307
Gulab C. Gupta, J. 1. The petitioner is under preventive detention pursuant to the order dated 4-1-1993 passed by the first respondent under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act) and is lodged in Central Prison, Madras. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid he has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the legal and constitutional validity thereof. 2. It appears that the officers of the Enforcement Directorate, Madras had the intelligence report that the petitioner was engaged in illegal purchase of foreign exchange and sending the same out of India. Pursuant to the said report they searched the residential premises of the petitioner and discovered Indian currency worth Rs. 3,40,000/- together with certain documents. Those documents and the currency were seized. The petitioner, is said to have given his statement under section 40 of the Act stat...
Raja D.V. Seetharamayya Bahadur Vs. Sixth Wealth-tax Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-26-1994
Reported in: (1995)127CTR(Mad)3; [1995]213ITR502(Mad)
Gulab C. Gupta, J. 1. These petitions relate to assessment and reassessment of wealth-tax for the years from March 31, 1970, to March 31, 1982, against the petitioner. The wealth-tax assessments for the assessments years 1970-71 to 1974-75, were made on May 31, 1979, and for the year 1975-76 on March 12, 1980. The petitioner-assessee had filed appeals against them, which were allowed and the cases remanded. The assessments for the years 1976-77 and 1977-78 were made on March 28, 1981, and March 3, 1982, the appeals filed against the same are still pending. The assessments for the subsequent years have not been completed. After the remand order passed in the appeals aforesaid, the Income-tax Officer referred the matter for revaluation of various assets by the Valuation Officer under section 16A of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The said Valuation Officer had issued three notices to the petitioners dated September 13, 1982 and September 14, 1982, proposing to determine the market value of the...
Metal Box India Ltd. Vs. Madras Telephones and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-25-1994
Reported in: [1995]83CompCas117(Mad)
S.M. Ali Mohamed, J.1. By consent of both the parties the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 2. The petitioner is Metal Box India Limited, public limited company registered under the Companies Act, 1956. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition filed by the general manager of the company that due to certain difficulties the petitioner-company has been declared as a sick industrial company under section 3(1)(o) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and at present is awaiting a rehabilitation package from BIFR for its revival. The Board has further appointed ICICI as the operating agency within the meaning of section 3(1)(i) of the Act to prepare a report for the rehabilitation of the petitioner-company. However, the report has not yet been submitted by ICICI and by virtue of the operation of section 17(1) of the Act, section 22 gets attracted and in view of the same any ex...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. T.G.K. Raman (Deceased) by Legal Repres ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-25-1994
Reported in: (1995)127CTR(Mad)370; [1995]214ITR11(Mad)
Thanikkachalam, J.1. At the instance of the Department, the Tribunal has referred the following question for the opinion of this court under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1975-76 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in excluding the sum of Rs. 1,472 being the dividend in respect of the share dealt with by the assessee under the settlement deed dated March 26, 1974, included under section 64(1)(v) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. In the assessment year under consideration, the assessee had transferred 3,200 shares in Messrs. Rane Brake Linings Limited to a discretionary trust created on March 27, 1974, for the benefit of his minor son, T. G. K. Raman. Relying upon section 64(1)(v) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Officer included the income arising out of the shares in the hands of the assessee for the assessment year under consideration. On appeal, following his earlier order, t...
Sri Venkateswara Hindu Colony Elementary School, Represented by Its Co ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-25-1994
Reported in: (1995)2MLJ101
ORDERN. Arumugham, J.1. The unsuccessful plaintiff before the trial court is the revision petitioner herein who seeks the intervention of this Court in setting aside the common order passed by the learned District Munsif, Poonamallee in LA. Nos. 1600, 1881 and 1882 of 1993 in O.S. No.991 of 1993 passed on 1.9.1993.2. The brief facts of the case which led to this revision are stated as follows:The educational institution by name Sri Venkates wara Hindu Colony Elementary School by its Administrator K.V. Thambiran, a lessee under the said colony Building Society has filed a suit before the learned District Munsif, Poonamallee in O.S. No.991 of 1993 against the Commissioner, Alandur Municipality for the bare relief of permanent injunction restraining him and his servants and staff not to interfere with the peaceful enjoyment and possession of their building and property, and in which, an interim order of injunction was also sought for in I.A. No. 1600 of 1993 and in which an ad-interim inj...
L. Ramakrishnan Chettiar and ors. Vs. L.Rmk. Narayanan Alias Lakshmi N ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-25-1994
Reported in: (1995)1MLJ368
ORDERN. Arumugham, J.1. The twelve defendants before the trial court are the appellants herein in C.M.A. No. 621 of 1992 and the petitioners in C.M.P. No. 10175 of 1992 seeking the relief of stay of operation of the order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Sivaganga in I.A. No. 527 of 1991 in O.S. No. 43 of 1982 dated 13.3.1992 appointing joint receiver to maintain and manage totally 17 items of the suit properties against the plaintiffs/ respondents and their defendants.2. The short facts which are necessary for the purpose of disposing these civil miscellaneous petitions are stated as follows:The second respondent herein has filed a suit in O.S. No. 43 of 1982 on the file of the Sub Court, Sivaganga, for the relief of partition, separate possession mesne profits and other reliefs against the appellants herein as well as the other respondents. Most of them are their brothers, sisters and Legal representatives and alienee and they are in actual possession and enjoyment of all the...
P.M. Kathiresan Vs. Shanmugham, Retired Captain
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-24-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2508
ORDER1. Taking cognizance of a private complaint, filed under Section 200 Criminal Procedure Code by the respondent herein, for the alleged offence under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code, by the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Madurai, is the subject matter of challenge in this proceedings instituted under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, praying to quash the same on several grounds by the petitioner-accused. 2. The noting of the brief facts are extracted as hereunder :- A written complaint, dated 27-10-1987 by the revision petitioner herein was lodged with the Superintendent of Police, Madurai, allegedly containing certain defamatory remarks against the respondent herein, which was taken note of by the respondent herein sometime later and on coming to know of the same and aggrieved on finding it to be defamatory, he has filed the private complaint under Section 200 Criminal Procedure Code before the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Madurai, against the petitioner herei...
Agro Group Transport Ltd. Vs. E. Murugan and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-24-1994
Reported in: [1995(70)FLR538]
K.A. Swami, C.J.1. This appeal is preferred against the order dated 4.7.1994 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. No. 10518 of 1984. As the learned single Judge has dismissed the writ petition, the petitioner therein has come in appeal. 2. In the writ petition, the petitioner/Management has sought for quashing the order dated 17.9.1984 passed by the Additional Labour Court, Madurai in I.D. No. 115 of 1983. That dispute relates to the dismissal of the first respondent herein from the service of the appellant. Respondent No. 1 was a driver. There was domestic enquiry held against him on certain charges. The domestic enquiry resulted against him and consequently he was removed from service. Hence dispute was raised before the Labour Court. 3. Before the Labour Court, the case pleaded by the first respondent is that he was directed by the enquiry officer to go out of the enquiry room and as such was not permitted to cross-examine the witness therefore, the whole enquiry was ex-parte....
S. Saikumari Vs. P. Mohanasundaram
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-24-1994
Reported in: I(1995)DMC520
S.S. Subramani, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the counter-petitioner against the decision of the Principal Family Court, Madras in H.M.O.P No. 1071 of 1988. It was originally filed before the City Civil Court, Madras. By the impugned decision, the Family Court has allowed judicial separation. The wife has come up with this appeal.2. The relevant facts are as follows:The respondent married the appellant on 31.10.1977. A daughter was born to them, who is named as Shanmugha Priya. On the date of the petition, she is seven years old. The petition filed by the husband was one for divorce under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The ground urged for divorce is cruelty. Paragraphs 4, 5, 6 and 7 are the allegations which constitute a cause of action for filing the petition. They are as follows:'...It is submitted that even though the respondent promised that she would be a house-wife and look after the household work, prior to the solemnization of the marriage between the p...
Agro Gargo Transport Limited, Harbour Constitution Road Vs. E. Murugan ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-24-1994
Reported in: (1994)2MLJ507
K.A. Swami, J.1. This appeal is preferred against the order dated 4.7.1994 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. No. 10518 of 1984. As the learned single Judge has dismissed the writ petition, the petitioner therein has come in appeal. 2 In the writ petition, the petitioner/ Management has sought for quashing the order dated 17.9.1984 passed by the Additional Labour Court, Madurai in I.D. No. 115 of 1983. That dispute relates to the dismissal of the first respondent herein from the Service of the appellant. Respondent No. 1 was a driver. There was domestic enquiry held against him on certain charges. The domestic enquiry resulted against him and consequently he was removed from service. Hence dispute was raised before the Labour Court.3. Before the Labour Court, the case pleaded by the first respondent is that he was directed by the enquiry officer to go out of the enquiry room did as such he was not permitted to cross-examine the witness therefore, the whole enquiry was ex pane. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »