Chennai Court March 1996 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.
Arokiasamy Vs. State by Public Prosecutor
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-26-1996
Reported in: 1996CriLJ3390
Janarthanam, J.1. The appellant is accused in S.C. 173/87 on the file of Additional Sessions Judge, Ramanathapuram at Madurai. 2. On committal, he was found guilty under S. 302, IPC, convicted thereunder and sentenced to imprisonment for life. 3. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, the present action had been resorted to. 4. Brief facts are : (a) The Scene village Mulliyarendal is situate within the jurisdictional limits of Ilayankudi Police Station, 10 k.ms. on the South west. Munaiventri is an adjacent village situate one mile away from the scene village. These two villages are separated by a lake going by the name Mulliyarendal Kanmoi. (b) One Santhiyagu Udayar, (since deceased), a resident of Mulliyarendal is the father of P.W. 1. His wife is one Siranmani. The accused is none else than his brother-in-law, being the brother of his wife. He is a resident of Munaiventri Village. He owns lands in both the villages. He is owning certain holdings of lands of Punja cultivation at ...
Commissioner of Gift Tax Vs. S.A.M.S. Hamid Hussain
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-26-1996
Reported in: [1997]225ITR656(Mad)
1. In this tax case preferred by the Revenue, relating to the asst. yr. 1974-75, the question referred to us, under s. 26 of the Gift-tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') are as follows : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the value of the property should be determined on rental basis applying r. 1BB of the WT Rules, 1957 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified, while setting aside the assessment for being redone by the CGT, in directing him to determine the value of the property gifted, on rental basis 2. The short facts are as follows : One S. M. A. Syed Abdul Cader, transferred by way of gift, the house property at No. 32, Nungambakkam High Road, Madras, to his two grand nephews on 1st Feb., 1974. The return of gift was filed, declaring the value of the gift at Rs. 1,25,000. The GTO, however, took the value of the Assistant Valuation Officer, to ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sundaram Industries
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-26-1996
Reported in: [1998]232ITR337(Mad)
Thanikkachalam, J. 1. At the instance of the Department, the Tribunal referred the following question for the opinion of this Court under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 : 'Whether the amount of depreciation allowed to the assessee on cars maintained by it and which has been used if not wholly at least partly for the personal purposes of the directors, can be taken into consideration for purposes of disallowance in excess of the prescribed limit of Rs. 72,000 ?' 2. The assessee is a private limited company. It maintained some cars for the purpose of business. The contention of the Revenue was that since the cars were also used for the personal use of the directors, depreciation allowable on the written down value of the cars should be proportionately reduced and disallowed by applying s. 40(c) of the IT Act. The Tribunal for the earlier assessment years held that s. 40(c) provides for disallowance of any expenditure or allowance in respect of any assets of the company used by any person ...
C. Perumal Vs. the Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Elecy. Board an ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-26-1996
Reported in: (1997)IILLJ594Mad; (1996)IIMLJ213
ORDER1. This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner for the issue of certiorari or any other propriate Writ Order of direction calling for records of the first respondent in Memo No. SET/Admn. IIIA 1. IF. DIR. 14208/90 dt. July 17, 1990 and to quash the same. - 2. The case of the Writ Petitioner as seen from the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition runs as follows: The petitioner was appointed as a nominal muster roll employeed by the first respondent in the year 1967. In 197 1, he was promoted to the post of helper. On October 1, 1977, he was further promoted as Wireman under the control of the first respondent. 1, During 1987, he was posted to Valapandal. One Palaniswamy, Junior Engineer, was posted in the area. There was misunderstanding between the said J. E. and the petitioner. The petitioner's wife was suffering from cancer and she was admitted in Hospital at Madras for treatment. Later on, she was admitted in the Govt. Arignar Anna Memorial Cancer Hospital, Ka...
Maruvana Beevi Vs. M. Abdul Salam
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-26-1996
Reported in: (1996)2MLJ41
S.S. Subramani, J. 1. Plaintiff in O.S. No. 79 of 1981, on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Nagapattinam, is the appellant before this Court.2. In the plaint, the plaintiff/ appellant has sought for the following reliefs: (1) To pass a preliminary decree for accounts, directing the defendant to render true and proper accounts of income and expenditure; (2) for rendition of accounts by the defendant regarding the amount due to the plaintiff's 1/6th share to be ascertained and for passing of a final decree in respect of that sum against the defendant; and (3) for costs of the suit.3. The material averments in the plaint are, that the plaintiff is the daughter of one Mohideen Bava, who died on 27.2.1976. It is said that late Mohideen Bava had two daughters and two sons, and the parties are governed by Mohammedan Law. It is further said that as per law of inheritance, the plaintiff is entitled to 1/6th share. It is further stated that the deceased had certain properties at Penang...
Alagammai Alias Indirani and anr. Vs. Managing Director, Marudhu Pandi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-26-1996
Reported in: 1997ACJ1323
P. Sathasivam, J.1. The claimants in M.C.O.P. Nos. 638 of 1985 and 639 of 1985 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Tiruchirapalli are the appellants in the above appeals.2. C.M.A. No. 617 of 1989 is filed against the award of M.C.O.P. No. 639 of 1985 by the wife and minor son Nachiappan of the deceased Alagappan. C.M.A. No. 626 of 1989 is filed against M.C.O.P. No. 638 of 1985 by the mother of the deceased Karuppan alias Kumar. Both the appeals arose out of one accident. The facts leading to the filing of two claim petitions, one for the death of K.R. Alagappan and another for the death of Alagappan's minor son Karuppan are as follow:3. According to claimants on 24.10.1985 at Mannarpuram at about 8.30 p.m. while the deceased, K.R. Alagappan, was driving his scooter TDY 3012 along with his minor son Karuppan alias Kumar, his wife Alagammai alias Indirani as a pillion rider, after passing of the four-road junction proceeding towards west keeping to his left, a bus bearing...
Sivanandi Vs. State by Public Prosecutor
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-25-1996
Reported in: 1996CriLJ4469
Janarthanam, J.1. The appellant was accused in S.C. No. 111 of 1987 on the file of Court of Session, Madurai Division, Madurai. 2. On trial, he was found guilty under section 302, IPC, convicted thereunder and sentenced to imprisonment for life. He was, however, acquitted of the charge under section 324, IPC, as relatable to the causation of injuries to one Lakshmi, as a consequence of non-examination of the said victim of assault. 3. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, the present action had been resorted to. 4. Brief facts are :- (a) The scene of occurrence, viz., Kuyavarpalayam, Bodi is situate within the jurisdictional limits of Bodi Town Police Station. The accused was originally residing in a house at Kuvayarpalayam of Bodi along with his wife by name Lakshmi. He had been eking out his livelihood by doing cooli work. One pappathi is the daughter of the accused. The house in which the accused had been living along with his wife and daughter Pappathi belongs to P.W. 1, whose ...
The Chief Engineer/Personnel, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Vs. the Lab ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-25-1996
Reported in: 1996(2)CTC50
ORDERS.M. Abdul Wahab, J.1. This writ petition has been preferred to issue a writ of certionari or any other appropriate writ or order, calling for the records in I.D. No. 171 of 1984, dated 13.8.1986, and quash the award of the first respondent, viz., the Labour Court, Coimbatore, in the said ID.2. The second respondent has moved the Labour Court on behalf of a worker, R. Ramaswami. The claim of the said Ramaswami was that he should have been paid the arrears of salary after refixation of his pay from the date of his promotion as assistant, viz., from 25.6.1962. Subsequently, he was reverted to the post of Clerk from 1.6.1963 to 13.4.1963. His junior, one V.R. Sambandam, Typist, was promoted as assistant on 26.5.1962 and he continued as assistant. After prolonged correspondence with the petitioner, his seniority was restored to the original position as on 25.6.1992 by memos dated 11.9.1970 and 18.4.1973 of the Superintending Engineer, Mettur Dam. Further, the Superintending Engineer, ...
Chandrasekharan Vs. Babu Machine Works, a Partnership Firm
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-25-1996
Reported in: (1996)1MLJ613
Govardhan, J.1. First defendant is the appellant.2. The averments in the petition are briefly as follows : The petitioner is carrying on business in hand pumps for pumping water under the trade mark 'Sun' which appears on the outer surface of the barrel of the pump. It is a simplified figure of the 'Sun'. The trade mark is within a circle from which lines representing light rays emanate outwards and inside the circle, the word 'Sun' is written in Roman Capital letters. The trade mark has been registered by the petitioner on 1.3.1983 under Registration No. 322007. Even before the registration of the mark, he was manufacturing and marketing the same. The plaintiff belongs to the family of Adithans Industrialists in Tirunelveli District. The meaning of the work 'Adithan' is 'Sun'. The Sun Mark was a strong persuasive factor at the point of sale. The pumps manufactured by the petitioner have enjoyed a good reputation and wide market in the District of Tirunelveli and outside. The first res...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. V.S.T. Motors P. Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-24-1996
Reported in: (1997)140CTR(Mad)245; [1997]226ITR155(Mad)
K.A. Thanikkachalam, J. 1. In accordance with the direction given by this court, the Tribunal referred the following three questions for the opinion of this court under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the rental income received by the assessee from letting out of the portions in the property used for its business purpose should be treated as business income and not under the head 'Income from property and the repairs to that building' should be considered under the head 'Business' (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the sum of Rs. 34,100 being commission paid to V.S.T. Padmanabhan and Bros., is an admissible deduction (3) Whether the Appellate Tribunal's view that V.S.T. Padmanabhan and Bros., had rendered services to the assessee-company to war...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »