Chennai Court August 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.
Sudalaimuthu and Etc. Vs. State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-02-1996
Reported in: II(1996)ACC468; 1997CriLJ1038
ORDER1. Crl.R.C. No. 633 of 1990, filed by the petitioner K. A. Mydeen, a driver (A-1) is directed against the Judgment of conviction and sentence imposed by the Judicial Magistrate, Valliyoor, in C.C. No. 449 of 1989, as confirmed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli, in C.A. No. 157 of 1990. Crl.R.C. No. 632 of 1990, filed by the petitioner Sudalaimuthu, a Conductor (A2) is directed against the conviction and sentence imposed by the Judicial Magistrate, Valliyoor in C.C. No. 449 of 1989, as confirmed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli, in C.A. No. 158 of 1990. Both the petitioners were convicted under Section 304-A I.P.C., and sentenced to undergo R.I. for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,500/-.2. The short facts leaving to the above revisions could be summarised as follows :- The petitioner in Crl.R.C. No. 633 of 1990, K. A. Mydeen, and the petitioner in Crl.R.C. No. 632 of 1990, Sudalaimuthu, were the Driver and Conductor of the bus belongs to Kattabomman Tra...
The Tamilnadu State Transport and Transport Corporations Retired Emplo ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-02-1996
Reported in: (1997)ILLJ453Mad
ORDER1. This writ petition is for a writ of certiorari-fled mandamus to quash the order dated February 22, 1989 in letter No. 66269/Tpt.I/86-8 and to pay health allowance to the erstwhile employees of the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation pensioners from April 1, 1989 onwards, to issue medical identification card and to pay health allowance to them from July 1, 1982 onwards. 2. The case of the Petitioners is as follows : The petitioners' association is a registered one under the Societies Registration Act. They were employees of the State Transport Department. After formation of the Transport Corporations from May 1, 1975 they were absorbed in various corporations. The absorption was based on the option to be exercised by them on or before May 1, 1975. The persons who opted to be absorbed would be entitled to pension, gratuity and other benefits available to the Government servants. 2 The members of the association retired from service of the Corporations after their absorption. W...
Ramaswamy Nadar Vs. V.S. Alagar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-02-1996
Reported in: 1996(2)CTC301
ORDERD. Raju, J.1. The tenant is the petitioner in the above revision petition. The landlord has sought for eviction of the petitioner - tenant under Section 10(3)(a)(i) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on the ground that the building is required for the occupation of the landlord's father, who is not occupying any residential building of his own in the town. It is unnecessary to deal with the other details relating to the nature of the tenancy, monthly rent, etc., except adverting to the fact that the landlord is said to be in Canada and his father aged 72, a widower wants to settle at Srivilliputhur, so that during his last days he can visit and have darshan of Shri Andal temple at Srivilliputhur. It was also claimed that the father is a member of the family and therefore, the building is required for bona fide occupation.2. The tenant contested the claim on several grounds including that there are two other sons, t...
Thangavel Udayar Vs. R.K. Raju Mudaliar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-02-1996
Reported in: 1996(2)CTC304; (1997)IMLJ19
ORDERP. Sathasivam, J.1. Defendant in O.S. No. 52 of 1978 on the file of District Munsif, Kallakurichi, is the appellant in the above appeal. The respondent, plaintiff in the said suit filed the same for recovery of Rs. 2,500 being-the expenses and damages by way of defamation.2. The case of the plaintiff as seen from the plaint is briefly narrated hereunder:-The plaintiff is a pawn broker. He is carrying on his business as 'Murugan Financiers' at Kallakurichi. He belongs to a respectable and noble family. The defendant has lodged a false complaint against the plaintiff before the Sub Inspector of Police, Kallakurichi, on 27.7.1976 under Sections 406, 420 and 120(B) I.P.C. The police have registered a criminal case against the plaintiff in Crime No. 648 of 1976. On account of the complaint, the plaintiff has to obtain anticipatory bail from the Sessions Judge, Cuddalore, and the plaintiff attended the Court of Judicial Sub Divisional Magistrate at Ulundurpet for a number of hearings. F...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jawahar Mills Ltd. (No. 2)
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-01-1996
Reported in: (1997)142CTR(Mad)68; [1997]226ITR230(Mad)
K.A. Thanikkachalam J.1. In accordance with the directions given by this court, the Tribunal referred the following question for the opinion of this court under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in law in holding that the expenditure incurred on replacement of false ceiling should be allowed as a revenue expenditure while computing the income for the assessment year 1977-78 ?' 2. The assessee is a public limited company engaged in the manufacture of cotton yarn at Salem. For the assessment year 1977-78 in respect of which the previous year ended with March 31, 1977, the assessee had to replace a false ceiling covered by hardboard. There was a ceiling of about 60,478 sq. ft. all covered by hardboard which was replaced by asbestos cement sheet over a period of three years. The work of replacement commenced from 1974. The total outlay was Rs. 2,86,024. According to the Inspecting As...
The Management of State Farms Corporation of India Ltd., Melchengam We ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-01-1996
Reported in: (1997)ILLJ20Mad
ORDER1. By consent W.P. 10673/87 was taken up for consideration, as the subject matter in this writ petition is the same as in all other writ petitions. These batch of cases relate to the Central State Farm. Melchanagam West Post, North Arcot District. 2. The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a unit of the State Farm Corporation of India Limited, the Central Government Undertaking. It runs a model farm. All that it does is to maintain the farm by carrying out the agricultural operations and incidental functions. The main function of the petitioner is agricultural in nature. It produces quality seeds for being supplied to the state Governments. Only if there are left overs they are supplied to the local farmers. Thus the petitioner has no systematic activity producing goods or rendering service. Therefore it is not an industry as per Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The appropriate Government is the Central Government under Section 2(a) of the Industrial...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›