Chennai Court February 1997 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.
The Management of Eswaran and Sons Engineers (P) Ltd. Vs. Iii Addi. La ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-11-1997
Reported in: (1997)ILLJ698Mad
Kanakaraj, J. 1. The second respondent had entered the services of the appellant company on August 19, 1965 in the Security Department. On June 11, 1980 at about 7.00 a.m. the Assistant Security Officer had allocated the work of the second respondent between 23 hours on June 11, 1980 and 07 hours on June 12, 1980. The second respondent was posted at the main gate of the Switchgear factory. Apparently irked by the place of posting the second respondent is said to have used vulgar and bad language against his superior officer. A charge memo was issued in this connection on June 14, 1980. An enquiry was conducted and on perusal of the report of the Enquiry Officer, the appellant management decided not to continue the services of the second respondent, especially because of his previous conduct. The second respondent is said to have received all the amounts due to him including the provident fund and gratuity amounts. The second respondent also wanted a service certificate, apparently to e...
Emmanuel Teacher Training Institute Represented by Its Manager, C. Raj ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-11-1997
Reported in: (1997)1MLJ537
K.A. Swami, C.J.1. In all these writ petitions, the petitioners have sought for quashing the orders of the State Government refusing to grant 'no objection certificate' as required by Regulations 5(e) and 5(f) of the National Council for Teacher Education (Application for Recognition, the Manner for Submission Determination of Conditions for Recognition of institutions and Permission to Start New Course or Training) Regulations, 1995. (hereinafter referred to as the 'Regulations').2. The State Government has rejected the applications, seeking 'no objection certificate' on the folk-wing grounds:In Tamil Nadu trained certificate holders are unable to be given appointment, therefore no objection' will not be given and the said decision is taken by the Government. This is for your information.3. The State Government, by G.O.Ms. No. 802 (Education, Science and Technology Department), dated 16.9.1994 took a policy decision that no new private teacher training Institute(s) shall be permitted ...
P.N. Vengatesan and anr. Vs. Nada Ilamady and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-11-1997
Reported in: (1997)2MLJ71
AR. Lakshmanan, J.1. The appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pondicherry in M.A.C.T.O.P. No. 135 of 1992, dated 22.2.1994 wherein a total compensation of Rs. 5,75,000 together with interest at 12 per cent per annum from 12.3.1993, the date of filing of the petition till realisation subject to payment of court-fee, if any.2. The respondent No. 1 is the wife of the deceased Ramanathan and respondents 2 and 3 are the minor daughters represented by their mother and next friend the first respondent herein.3. They filed M.C.O.P. No. 135 of 1992 claiming a compensation of Rs. 10,00,000 for the death of the first respondent's husband in a road accident that occurred on 6.1.1991 at about 6.45 hours alleging that on the said date while her husband was riding on a scooter PYQ 7471 along Mahatma Gandhi Road, Pondicherry from South to north near Ashramam Cement Godown, the bus bearing registration No. PYT 1155 belonging to the first appellant P.N. Vengatesan...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vs. D. Swamy and Co. (P) Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-11-1997
Reported in: (1999)153CTR(Mad)333
ORDERN. V. BALASUBRAMANIAN, J.At the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal has stated a case and referred the following question of law under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, for the opinion of this Court.'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled to relief under s. 80J of the IT Act?'2. The assessment year involved in the tax case is for the year 1978-79. The assessee during the assessment proceedings for the year 1978-79, claimed deduction under s. 80J of the IT Act, 1961, but the ITO following his earlier order, rejected the claim of the assessee. The assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A), Madras and the CIT(A), following his earlier order for the asst. yr. 1977-78, allowed the claim of the assessee. On further appeal to the Tribunal by the Department, the Tribunal, following its order in ITA Nos. 1337 and 1448/Mad/1980 dt. 19th Aug., 1981 for the asst. yr. 1976-77 in the assessee's own case, he...
Sterling Horticulture and Research Ltd. Vs. Appropriate Authority and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-11-1997
Reported in: (1997)140CTR(Mad)112
ORDERJAYASIMHA BABU, J. :The proposed transferee has filed this petition challenging the order made by the Appropriate Authority directing the pre-emptive purchase of the property known as 'Grayshott' in the Registration District of Madras-Chengalpattu and the Sub-Registration District of Mylapore bearing No. 5, Greenways Road, Adayar, Madras, now known as 4, Bishop Garden Extension, Raja Annamalaipuram, Madras-28 and measuring 2 acres 11 grounds 792 sq. ft., the amount of the discounted consideration being Rs. 19,18,04,260.2. From 37-I was filed by the petitioner and the owner, respondent No. 2 herein, on 27th July, 1995. That Form 37-I opens with the statement that it is an agreement made on 27th July, 1995 between the parties whereby the parties had agreed to transfer the property aforementioned. The particulars of the agreement are set out as annexures thereto. The area of the vacant land is mentioned as 6180 sq. mtrs. The area occupied by the superstructure is mentioned as 4406.92...
Tamilnadu Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income T ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-10-1997
Reported in: [1997]228ITR399(Mad)
Thanikkachalam, J.1. In pursuance of the direction given by this Court in TCP No. 19 of 1981 dt. 30th March, 1981, the Tribunal referred the following two questions for the opinion of this Court, under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the petitioner is entitled to depreciation and/or development rebate as claimed in respect of asst. yrs. 1973-74 and 1974-75 (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that the petitioner is not entitled to the deduction of the entire sum of Rs. 55,000 being the contribution to the Paddy Processing Research Centre ?' 2. The assessee is a company, whose shares are wholly held by the State Government of Tamilnadu. The business of the assessee, as its name indicates, is to ensure supply of essential goods. One of the issues that arose for consideration related to the claim for depreciation and developmen...
V. Ramakrishnan Sons Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-10-1997
Reported in: [1999]235ITR457(Mad)
Thanikkachalam, J. 1. In pursuance of the directions given by this Court in TC No. 486 of 1980 dt. 23rd February, 1981, the Tribunal referred the following question, for the opinion of this Court under s. 256(2) of the IT Act : 'In the facts and circumstances of the case, was the Tribunal correct in holding that the company had no income from business and that the income from the lease was income from other sources ?' 2. For the asst. yr. 1974-75, the accounting year was the year ended 30th September, 1973. The gross total income as determined by the ITO by his order dt. 21st December, 1976 was Rs. 15,33,909. The ITO had treated no part of the income as arising from business. The assessee owned plants and machinery relating to a foundry. The foundry had been leased out from 1965 onwards and during the accounting year the lessee was subsidiary of the assessee. Before the ITO, the assessee claimed that the lease income was income from the business. The ITO on the ground that the foundry ...
Seshasayee Paper Mills and ors. Vs. Seshasayee Paper and Boards Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-10-1997
Reported in: (2000)IIILLJ617Mad
P. Sathasivam, J.1. Four labour unions of the Seshasayee Paper Mill have approached this Court by way of the present writ petition for mandamus directing the respondent-management not to discontinue the medical allowance extended to them which has been a part of their service conditions in terms of Section 72 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The facts leading to the filing of the above writ petition are briefly stated thereunder:The respondent-management is engaged in the manufacture of paper and boards. According to the petitioners' union, about 1200 workmen and 600 staff are employed in the respondent-management. Their monthly salary exceeds Rs. 3,000. Hence, they were not covered under the provisions of the Act. It is also averred that the respondent-management were extending to them medical allowance which has become a part of their salary. Each workman was extended a sum of Rs. 200 to Rs. 400 depending upon their basic salary. T...
Bala Subramanian Vs. Rshaath Risha and 5 ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-10-1997
Reported in: 1997(1)CTC495
ORDERJagadeesan, J. 1. The tenant is the petitioner. The respondents filed R.C.O.P. No. 14 of 1993 to evict the petitioner herein. The petitioner was set ex parte on 9.6.1993. He has filed an application I.A.No. 49 of 1993 to set aside the order, setting him ex parte. While the said application was pending, an ex parte order of eviction was passed on 21.6. 1993. The application I.A. No. 49 of 1993 was dismissed on merits on 1.10.1993. The petitioner has filed I.A.No. 2 of 1994 to set aside the order passed in I.A. No. 49 of 1993. The Rent Controller as well as the Appellate Authority dismissed the application I.A.No. 2 of 1994 on the ground that the same is not maintainable and the proper remedy for the petitioner is to file an appeal against the order of dismissal of I.A.No. 49 of 1993. Now the revision has been filed against the order of the Appellate Authority in R.C.O.P. No. 6 of 1994, confirming the order of the Rent Controller, dismissing the application I.A.No. 2 of 1994.2. The ...
A. Thangamuthu Vs. the Director of Rural Development and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-10-1997
Reported in: 1997(1)CTC503
ORDERE. Padmanabhan, J. 1. The petitioner, Ex-President of Mattaparai Panchayat in challenging the impugned proceedings of the 1st respondent in No. 60310/81/K4-5, dated 26.10.1987 by which an order of sur- charge been passed against him for a sum of Rs. 1335 being the alleged loss caused to the Panchayat.2. The petitioner states that he was elected as President on 25.7.1970, that he took charge on 2.8.1970 as President ad that one Mr. K.S. Muthuswamy was the President of Mattaparai Panchayat till 2.8.1970. During the tenure of office, the said Muthuswamy had auctioned Karuvela trees on 6.7.1970, one Nagalingam was the successful bidder for a sum of Rs. 3560. The Panchayat by resolution dated 13.7.1970 confirmed the auction in favour of the said Nagalingam, who remitted Rs. 890 only. The balance amount of Rs. 2670 had not been collected as seen from the Audit report for the year 1970-71. According to the petitioner, the 2nd respondent sought to issue surcharge proceedings against the p...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »