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.
income-tax Officer Vs. Arihant Trust and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-17-1994
Reported in: (1995)127CTR(Mad)448; [1995]214ITR306(Mad)
Rengasamy, J. 1. All these revisions arise from the common order of the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (E.O. II), Madras, in M.P. No. 670 of 1989 in E.O.C.C. Nos. 305 of 1988 to 331 of 1988 discharging the respondent herein under section 245(1), Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. The complainant, namely, the Income-tax Officer, filed 27 complaints against these respondents under section 276B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the failure of the respondents, the trust and its trustees, to deduct income-tax at source from the interest amount paid to the 27 beneficiaries of the trust. The trustees filed M.P. No. 670 of 1989 to discharge them as the first respondent trust has to be treated as an individual under section 194A of the Act and, therefore, the failure by the trust to deduct the tax will not amount to an offence. The learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (E.O. II), accepting the contention of the respondents/accused th...
M.C. Chinnaiah Vs. T. Kesavakonar, Correspondent and Secretary, Selva ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-17-1994
Reported in: (1995)1MLJ294
Srinivasan. J.1. The appellant was appointed as Headmaster of Selva Damodharan High School, Palakkarai, Trichy in 1968. The school was upgraded into Higher Secondary School by Government Order in G.O.Ms. No. 987, dated 7.6.1988. According to learned Counsel for the Management of the School, it is a Higher Secondary School for all purposes from 1.6.1988 itself, though the Higher Secondary Classes were actually opened from 30.7.1988. The Management passed an order on 27.7.1988 reverting the appellant from the post of Headmaster and posted him as B.T. Assistant in the Higher Secondary School with effect from the forenoon of 30.7.1988. The reason given in the order is that consequent on the upgradation of the school, the appellant was not fully qualified to hold the post of Higher Secondary School Headmaster as per rules. Challenging the correctness of the order, the appellant filed an appeal before the Joint Director of Schools (Education). By order dated 9.7.1990 the Joint Director allow...
The Saliar Mahajana Higher Secondary School Represented by Its Secreta ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-17-1994
Reported in: (1995)1MLJ303
1. For the purpose of brevity, it is enough to notice the facts in W.P. No. 1513 of 1989. The petitioner was working as a Post Graduate Assistant in the 2nd respondent private school. When the post of Headmaster fell vacant on 1.6.1983, the School Committee appointed the 3rd respondent who was working as an inducted Teacher to that post. Aggrieved by that order, the petitioner filed on appeal before the Joint Director (1st respondent) contending that under the relevant Rules, only a Post Graduate Assistant could be promoted to the post of Headmaster and not an inducted Teacher. The Joint Director accepted that plea and allowed the appeal by order dated 7.4.1984. That order is challenged by the School Management in W.P. No. 14852 of 1988. The 3rd respondent who was appointed by the Management, filed an appeal before the Tribunal against the orders of the Joint Director. The petitioner in W.P. No. 15130 of 1989 has filed W.P. No. 6944 of 1986 contending that the Tribunal has no jurisdict...
Mini Vs. James Koshy Alexander and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-17-1994
Reported in: (1994)2MLJ487
ORDERSrinivasan, J.1. In the Original Petition which is filed for declaration of nullity of the marriage by the wife, it is stated by her that the first respondent who was married by her on 25.8.1985 was a lunatic at the time of marriage. She has impleaded the parents of the first respondent as respondents 2 and 3 in the original petition. All the three respondents remained ex parte.2. The petitioner has given evidence as P.W. 1 she has spoken to the fact that ever since the marriage she noticed that the first respondent was taking medicines which will be normally taken by a lunatic. It is specifically stated by her that he was taking eskazine and pasipal which are medicines prescribed for psychiatric conditions. She has also deposed that his behaviour was not that of a normal person and he will be aggressive and violent at times and used to apologise when it subsides. He was not attending to the duty regularly. She took him to P.W. 2 who was professor of psychiatric Department in the ...
M. Sambandam Vs. M. Chockalingam
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-16-1994
Reported in: (1994)2MLJ582
Govardhan, J.1. The plaintiff is the appellant herein. The averments in the plaint are briefly as follows:The plaintiff and the defendant are the sons of one Manickam Pillai. They constituted a Hindu undivided joint family, owning and possessing extensive immovable properties. The family was managed by Manickam Pillai till 1953 and the management of the family estate was taken over the defendant as the eldest malt member of the family from 1953. The two sisters of the plaintiff and the defendant were already given in marriage, during the life time of Manickam Pillai. When the father died in 1953 the plaintiff was aged about 18 year sand the defendant' was aged about 33 years. The defendant, taking advantage of the emotional upheaval of the adolescent of the plain tiff, treated the plaintiff as puppet in his hand. The marriage of the defendant was celebrated by the father at the cost of the joint family funds. There are four children to the defendant. The eldest was graduated from Regio...
Great Success Martime and Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd., by their Power of Att ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-16-1994
Reported in: (1994)2MLJ452
ORDERAR. Lakshmanan, J.1. Application Nos. 101 and 102 of 1994 have been filed by the plaintiff to direct the defendants to furnish security in a sum of Rs. 31,91,977 and for a prohibitory order restraining the United Western Bank Ltd., Broadway Branch, from parting with the amount of Rs. 5,00,000 together with interest in respect of the fixed deposit amount in the joint account of N. Murughasan and M/s. Raj Maritimes respectively. In both these applications, notice was ordered by this Court.2. The defendants have filed Application Nos. 2677 and 2678 of 1994 to refer the matter for arbitration as stipulated in the memorandum of agreement dated 8.12.1992 and to grant stay of the suit and all proceedings in Application Nos. 101 and 102 of 1994.3. First, I will take up Application Nos. 2677 and 2678 of 1994. The only point that arises for consideration in these application is, whether the suit filed by the plaintiff/respondent is to be stayed and the matter to be referred for arbitration ...
M/S. Ganga Engineering Works Vs. M/S. Ganga Foundry
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-12-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Mad241
ORDER1. This revision is directed against an order in I. A. No. 94 of 1994 in O.S. No. 93 of 1991. That application is for stay of all further proceedings in the suit, O.S. No. 93 1991 field under S. 111 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). It was the contention of the petitioner that an application for rectification had been filed in the High Court under Section 56 of the Act and it was posted to 30-6-1994. The trial court has dismissed the application taking the view that the provisions of Section 111(2) of the Act have not been complied with by the petitioner herein and he is not entitled to claim the benefit of stay as provided in Cl. (1) of S. 111.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that even before the present application under Section 111 of the Act a prior application was presented in the District Court on 3-4-1992. But it was kepi unnumbered by the District Judge and ultimately it was returned to the petitioner in open...
S. Saravanan Alias Saravanaperumal Vs. the State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-12-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ1999
ORDER1. In Crime No. 546/94 of Tutirocin Central Police Station one Muruganantham is stated to have been attacked and murdered by A. 2 to A. 5 at 10.15 a.m. on 19-7-1994 at the instigation of petitioner Saravanan alias Saravanaperumal. Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in the event of arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 147, 148, 341 and 302 I.P.C. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that recently the petitioner was nominated as the State Deputy Leader of the Youth Wing of a political party. Aggrieved over this, the District Secretary of the rival party has instigated the complainant respondent police to add the name of the petitioner in the complaint. According to learned counsel, though the occurrence is stated to have taken place at 10.15 a.m. F.I.R. has reached the Police station which is 2 k.m. away from the scene of crime only at 4.30 p.m. In fact, an earlier F.I.R. prepared at 11.00 a.m. was suppressed and in the second F.I.R. the name of the petitioner was ...
G. Prabhakaran Vs. Southern Petrochemicals Industries Corporation Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-12-1994
Reported in: (1995)IILLJ6Mad
ORDERKanakaraj, J.1. The petitioner joined the services of the respondent as a Plant Operator Trainee on February 18, 1980. His duties are said to be to attend to the Chemical Control of the Laboratory engaged in analysing the raw materials and other products. With effect from November 1, 1985 he was posted Senior Technician (Operation). This apart, the petitioner claims to be an active member of the SPIC Employees' Union. He was elected as Vice-President during the years 1985-86 and 1988-89. During the year 1989-90, he was not elected. He was hoping to be nominated for the contest in the year 1993-94 for the post of the President. According to the petitioner, to prevent the petitioner from contesting the post of President, he was transferred to Madras. He joined duty at Madras on May 31, 1993. It is again the case of the petitioner that he was hoping to be nominated to contest the election for the post of Vice-President of the Union in June, 1993. It is the further case of the petitio...
Madan Mohan Vs. R. Pandiyan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-12-1994
Reported in: (1995)1MLJ275
ORDERN. Arumugham, J.1. As the Bar has insisted me to dispose of the civil revision petition alongwith the miscellaneous petitions and as the matter lies in a very short compass, I have heard to whole case and disposed of the civil revision petition itself.2. The defendant is the revision petitioner herein, who resisted the suit filed by the respondent before the trial court. The suit is for declaration of plaintiff s title to the entire suit property and for consequential relief of injunction, originally. The two reliefs were asked for by the respondent herein on the basis that the suit property was purchased by him from the wife and son of one Muthukumaraswamy, who is the original owner, under the sale deed dated 6.3.1982. The suit was resisted by the defendant inter alia contending that the defendant is in possession of the property in the capacity of a owner by purchasing the same from the original owner Muthukumaraswamy himself under a registered sale deed dated 10.3.1982. However...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »