Chennai Court April 1997 Judgments
Ranipet Municipality Rep. by Its Comer. and Special Officer, Ranipet V ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)CTC66
ORDER1. This is a revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to revise the order of the lower Court in I.A. No. 499 of 1996 in O.S.No. 396 of 1996 on the file of the District Munsif's Court, Ranipet.2. The material facts on the basis of which this revision is filed may be summarised as follows:- The petitioner is the Ranipet Municipality represented by its Commissioner. The plaint schedule property admittedly belongs to the petitioner. It is stated to be a weekly market. It is said that the respondent's grandfather took the vacant land on lease from the petitioner at Ranipet and the same was being used by him till 1966. Even in the year 1960, the respondent's grand-father had put up some superstructures on the site and he has been using the same as the weekly market till his lifetime in 1970. After his death, his grand-mother continued the arrangement and now it is the case of the respondent that he has been making use of the same and whatever amount is payable to the peti...
Tag this Judgment!Thirumathi Pushpa Bai Bainsingh Vs. District Collector Tirunelveli Kat ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)CTC281
ORDERJudgemend Pronounced by Thanikkachalam, A.C.J.,1. The writ petitioner is the appellant herein. The writ petitioner filed the writ petition for issue of a writ of cortiorarified mandamus, calling for the records relating to the order passed by the first respondent/District Collector, Tirunelveli, Kattabamman district, in Ra.Ka.No.Pal.16133 of 1997, dated 17.2.1997 and quash the same. The District Collector/first respondent passed an order, dated 17.2.1997, based on the report filed by the Tahsildar. Before the Tahsildar, the writ petitioner appeared and also gave his written submission. According to the writ petitioner, he has got no other land except the land under acquisition. It was also represented that in the land there are coconut yielding trees as evidenced by the adangal recorded, for the year 1996. Therefore, according to the counsel appearing for the appellant herein, without giving an opportunity to establish her case, the Collector passed the order on the basis of the r...
Tag this Judgment!M.V.P.B. Nammalwar Vs. the Commissioner, Hindu Relilgious and Charitab ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Mad287; (1997)IIMLJ191
ORDERAR. Lakshmanan, J. 1. The plaintiff who succeeded before the Sub-Court, Tirunelveli and unsuccessful before the learned single Judge of this Court, is the appellant in this Letters Patent Appeal.2. The short facts of the case are as follows : The appellant filed O,S. 130/80 on the file of the Sub-Court, Tirunelveli under Section 70 of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for setting aside the order passed by the Commissioner, H.R. & C.E. in A.P. No. 191 of 1976 which arose out of a petition filed by him before the Deputy Commissioner in O.A. No. 21/1976 for declaration that the Dakshinamoorthy Madam is not a math within the meaning of the Act. The Deputy Commissioner dismissed the said O.A. No. 21/76 and on appeal, the Commissioner confirmed the same. Therefore, to set aside the order of the commissioner and to declare that the said Dakshinamoorthy Madam is not a Math, the suit has been filed. 3. According to the appellant, t...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax and anr. Vs. T. N. K. and V. Educational Tr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-1997
Reported in: [1998]233ITR182(Mad)
Abdul hadi, J.1. All these tax case references preferred by the Revenue under s. 256 of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') are connected and hence they were heard together. 2. Out of the above cases, the following cases, which relate to the same respondent-assessee, viz., T.N.K. & V. Educational Trust, Madras, relate to the assessment years as shown below : Case No. Asst. yr.T.C. 786 of 1984 1970-71T.C. 411 of 1984 1971-72T.C. 412 of 1984 1972-73T.C. 413 of 1984 1973-74T.C. 414 of 1984 1974-75T.C. 415 of 1984 1975-76T.C. 416 of 1984 1976-77(2) The respondents-assessees and the assessment years in respect of the rest of the cases are as follows : Case No. Name of the respondents-assessees Asst. yr.T.C. 1 of 1997 K. N. Varadarajan Family Trust 1988-89T.C. 18 of 1997 -do- 1987-88T.C. 2 of 1997 P. Natarajan Family Trust 1987-88T.C. 3 of 1997 -do- 1988-89T.C. 4 of 1997 Ramesh Family Trust 1987-88T.C. 5 of 1997 -do- 1988-89T.C. 6 of 1997 Chandrasekhar Family Trust 1987-8...
Tag this Judgment!Greenham Estate (P.) Ltd. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-1997
Reported in: [1997]226ITR929(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J. 1. These tax case revision petitions arise under the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and relate to two assessment years, viz., 1976-77 and 1977-78. 2. The only point that arises for consideration in the above tax cases is whether the subsidy received by the assessee from the Rubber Board is to be treated as income from the land and, as such, exigible to tax under the Act, as held by the Tribunal, or is to be treated as capital receipt and, as such, not liable to be taxed. 3. The Agricultural Income-tax Officer in the assessment order passed for the assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78 held that the subsidy received by the assessee from the Rubber Board was a revenue receipt on the ground that the subsidy was made not only for planting of rubber, but also to cover the expenditure such as weeding, manuring, spraying and dusting to prevent pests. The Agricultural Income-tax Officer also held that the immature ar...
Tag this Judgment!S. Sundari Vs. the General Manager, Industrial Relations Section
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)CTC19
ORDERN.V. Balasubramaniam, J.1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issue a writ or Certiorari calling for the records of the respondent and to quash the show-cause notice issued by the General Manager, Industrial Relations Section, Personnel Wing, Head Office, Canara Bank, Bangalore in his Ref. No. IRS.DP.MC.CHF. 3503:VRI: dated 2.11.1991.2. The petitioner joined the service in Canara Bank in the year 1975 as an Officer Trainee, and she was promoted to the post of Manager in the year 1983. While she was functioning as Manager of Abiramapuram Branch of Canara Bank, Madras during the year 1986, she was suspended on the charges that she has passed certain cheques which were ultimately found to be forged ones. The substance of the criminal case initiated against the petitioner is as under: 'During the period of her service as Second Line Manager in Abiramapuram Branch, Madras, one Mukunthan was also working as a Clerk. In the said bran...
Tag this Judgment!Tube Suppliers Limited Vs. Govt. of Tamil Nadu and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)CTC213
ORDERN.V. Balasubramanian, J.1. The writ petitioner is a company. The writ petitioner has filed a petition in W.M.P. No. 565 of 1997 for the substitution of the present name of the company, 'MAC Industrial Products Ltd.' in the place of 'Tube Suppliers Ltd.'. Under the scheme of amalgamation, the company's name was changed as V.R.W. Industries Limited with effect from 13.11.1990 and by a subsequent amalgamation V.R.W. Industries Limited was merged with Tubes and Malleable Limited by an order of this court in Company Petition Nos.177 and 178 of 1974 and the name of the company was also changed to MAC Industrial Products Ltd. Since there is a change in the name of the petitioner by an order of this court, the petition in W.M.P. No. 565 of 1997 to amend the name of the petition in the cause title is ordered.2. The writ petitioner owns a piece of land in Vanagaram Village, Saidapet Taluk. The petitioner is running a factory manufacturing fire bricks. The petitioner set up the factory store...
Tag this Judgment!Thirumathi Pushpa Bai Balasingh Vs. the District Collector and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-1997
Reported in: (1998)2MLJ240
Thanikkachalam, Actg. C.J.1. The writ petitioner is the appellant herein. The writ petitioner filed the writ petition for issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records relating to the order passed by the first respondent/District Collector, Tirunelveli, Kottabomman district, in No. Ka.No. Pol.16133/97, dated 17.2.1997 and quash the same. The District Collector/first respondent passed on order, dated 17.2.1997, based on the report filed by the Tahsildar. Before the Tahsildar, the writ petitioner appeared and also gave his written submission. According to the writ petitioner, he has got no other land, except the land under acquisition. It was also represented that in the land there are coconut yielding trees as evidenced by the adongal record, for the year 1996. Therefore, according to the counsel appearing for the appellant herein, without giving on opportunity to establish her case, the Collector passed the order on the basis of the report filed by the Tahsildar. ...
Tag this Judgment!D. Nandakrishnan and anr. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-1997
Reported in: (1997)2MLJ397
ORDERE. Padmanabhan, J.1. The petitioners, who are brothers, owners of land comprised in Survey Nos. 159/3 and 159/4, Koyambedu Village, measuring Order 48 acres, who have joined together and filed the present Writ Petition praying for the issue of writ of certiorari to call for G.O.R. No. 221, Housing Department, dated 29.8.1975 and published in Government Gazette, dated 1.10.1975 and quash the same.2. According to the petitioners, the lands were purchased by their father Late Deivasigamnai Naicker under deed of purchase dated 7.5.1951 and 12.1.1955, which was partitioned among the petitioners under a deed of partition dated 25.7.1980.3. A Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was made in G.O.R. No. 221, Housing Department, dated 29.8.1975 for acquisition of an extent of 217.30 acres of land in Koyambedu Village for the creation of new neighbourhood, known as Kalaignar Karunanidhi Nagar Part II Scheme. The said G.O. was published in Government Gazette dated...
Tag this Judgment!A. Sakthivel Vs. the District Collector and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-1997
Reported in: (1998)1MLJ82
ORDERE. Padmanabhan, J.1. All the five writ petitions have been filed by the same petitioner.2. Writ Petition No. 7075 of 1995 has been filed by the petitioner, praying for the issue of writ of certio-rari, to call for and quash the records of the 2nd respondent bearing No. Na. Ka. 92 of 1995 dated 28.4.1995.3. Writ Petition No. 7235 of 1995 has been filed, praying this Court to issue a writ of certiorari to call for and quash the proceedings of the 2nd and 3rd respondents in Na. Ka. No. 92 of 1995 dated 9.5.1995.4. Writ Petition No. 1693 of 1996 was filed by the same petitioner, against the same respondents, seeking for the issue of Writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records and quash the proceedings of the 2nd respondent in Na. Ka. No. 368 of 1995 dated 8.2.1996 and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to issue an application for participating in the weekly auction of the Kannivadi Town Panchayat, scheduled to be held on 15.2.1996 or any other subsequent.5. Writ Petiti...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »