Chennai Court December 1999 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 Andhra Social and Cultural Association Rep by B. Veeriah General S ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-23-1999
Reported in: 2000(2)CTC235
ORDER1. Petitioner is an Association. They are the third respondent in I.A.Nos.18317 and 18318 of 1999 in O.S.No.7331 of 1999 of the file of XVIII Assistant Judge, Civil City Court, Chennai. The above revisions are filed against the ex parte interim orders passed under Order 39, Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure dated 19.11.1999. 2. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that this order is passed in violation of the mandatory provisions of order 39, Rule 3, CPC without giving reasons. It is further submitted that on the plaint averments, petitioner is not a member of the Association and that his application for membership has been rejected. Whileso, an injunction in the nature of a mandatory order to the respondent herein not to interfere from using the facilities as a member for his family members was granted erronerousely. Besides, the learned City Civil Court Judge also passed an interim order directing the respondents to accept the payment. Thus, accor...
Saraswathi Ammal Vs. Ponnammal and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-23-1999
Reported in: 2000(3)CTC710
ORDER1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of learned Subordinate Judge, Tiruchi in A.S.No.111 of 1986 in reversing that of learned District Munsif, Musiri in O.S.No.1411 of 1982. The plaintiff in the suit is the appellant in the above appeal. 2. The suit was filed for a decree for permanent injunction, the plaintiff contending that the suit property originally belonged to one Chellammal, wife of Periannan, the mother of the plaintiff, who was living at Penang. She purchased it for a sum of Rs.9,000 on 15.7.1960 from one Muthuswamy Pillai under registered sale deed-Ex.A-1. Chellammal was residing at Penang and the plaintiff is the only legal heir of Chellammal, living in India and the plaintiff had been entrusted with the property, to look after the same and to maintain proper accounts. Since then, the plaintiff was in possession and cultivating the property and paying the kist. No other person had any right or possession of the property. The first defendant was sister of the...
income-tax Officer Vs. Sakthi Finance Ltd. and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-23-1999
Reported in: [2001]247ITR593(Mad)
V. Bakthavatsalu J.1. All these appeals are preferred by the Income-tax Officer, Coimbatore, against the order of acquittal passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No. I, Coimbatore. The first accused is Sakthi Finance Limited, represented by N.K. Pai. The second accused is the chief executive and president of the company and the third accused is the general manager. But, in the cases relating to C.A. Nos. 279 of 1990 to C.A. No. 288 of 1990, the company and the second accused, N.K. Pat, alone are impleaded as accused.2. The complaint relating to C.A. No. 249 of 1990 and connected cases are filed under Section 276E read with Section 278B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The complaint relating to cases C.A. Nos. 279 of 1990 to C.A. No. 288 of 1990 are filed under Section 276DD read with Section 276B of the Income-tax Act.3. It is the case of the appellant/complainant that the first accused violated Section 269T by repayment of loan otherwise than by an account payee cheque and that they v...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. E. Prahalatha Babu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-23-1999
Reported in: [2001]249ITR309(Mad)
K. G. Balakrishnan, C. J.1. The respondent in the writ petition, Commissioner of Income-tax, is the appellant. The respondent herein submitted adeclaration under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997. The said Scheme came into force on July 1, 1997, and the last date for submitting the declaration was December 31, 1997. The declarant has to file the declaration without paying the tax payable under Section 66 of the Finance Act, 1997, and he may pay the same within three months from the date of filing of the declaration with simple interest at the rate of two per cent, per mensem. The respondent/petitioner failed to pay the tax, on the basis of the declaration filed by him, before the expiry of three months from the date of filing the declaration. The respondent ought to have paid the tax on or before March 28, 1998, but he could pay the same only on March 31, 1998. The appellant, therefore, did not accept the application of the respondent under the Voluntary Disclosure of Inc...
income Tax Officer Vs. Sakhti Finance Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-23-1999
Reported in: [2000]109TAXMAN376(Mad)
1. All these appeals are preferred by the Income Tax Officer, Coimbatore, against the order of acquittal passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Coimbatore. The first accused is Sakthi Finance Limited, represented by N. K. Pai. The second accused is the Chief Executive and President of the Company and third accused is the General Manager. But, in the cases relating to C.A. Nos. 279 of 1990 to C.A. No. 288 of 1990, the Company and second accused N. K. Pai alone are impleaded as accused.2. The complaint relating to C.A. No. 249 of 1990 and connected cases are filed under section 276E, read with section 278B, of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The complaint relating to cases C.A. Nos. 279 of 1990 to C.A.No.288 of 1990 are filed under section 276DD, read with section 276B, of the Act.3. It is the case of the appellant/complainant that the first accused violated section 269T by repayment of loan otherwise than by account payee cheque and that they violated section 269SS by accepting depo...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. E. Prahalatha Babu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-23-1999
Reported in: (2001)165CTR(Mad)167
K.G. Balakrishnan, C.J.The respondent in the writ petition, Commissioner, is the appellant. The respondent herein submitted a declaration under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997. The said scheme came into force on 1-7-1997, and the last date for submitting the declaration was 31-12-1997. The declarant has to file the declaration without paying the tax payable under section 66 of the Finance Act, 1997, and he may pay the same within three months from the date of filing of the declaration with simple interest at the rate of 2 per cent per mensem. The respondent/petitioner failed to pay the tax, on the basis of the declaration filed by him, before the expiry of three months from the date of filing the declaration. The respondent ought to have paid the tax on or before 28-3-1998, but he could pay the same only on 31-3-1998. The appellant, therefore, did not accept the application of the respondent under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme and as the respondent was denie...
Bhel Thuppuravu Thozhilalar Sangam, Bhel Ltd. Vs. Mgmt. of Bhel and or ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-22-1999
Reported in: (2000)ILLJ1533Mad
E. Padmanabhan, J.1. In W.P. No. 17938 of 1998, the writ-petitioner Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd., Ranipet, prays for the issue of a writ of mandamus forbearing the first respondent Deputy Chief Inspector of Factories, Vellore, from in any manner continuing with the proceedings No. 3775 of 1998, dated May 19, 1998 and No. 6151 of 1997, dated July 23, 1998.2. W.P. No. 263 of 1989, has been filed , by the BHEL Thuppuravu Thozhilalar Sangam, BHEL Ltd. Ranipet, praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent namely the management of BHEL, Ranipet, to implement the notification in G.O. Ms. No. 2082, issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu, Labour and Employment Department, dated September 19, 1998 and also to regularise all the existing workmen employed for sweeping and scavenging and to fix them in the regular scales of pay, with effect from October 1, 1998.3. W.P. No. 20325 of 1993 has been filed by the BHEL Thozhilaga Thuppuravu Thozhilalar Sangam, praying for the iss...
C.A. Abraham and ors. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax and ors ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-21-1999
Reported in: [2002]255ITR540(Mad)
K. Govindarajan J. 1. A search was conducted on the residential premises of Sri C. A. Abraham (SR) on December 14,1995. During the course of search, the officials had seized certain incriminating documents revealing the investments made by him in movable and immovable properties. It was also revealed, the assessee was doing business in benami names. So a notice under Section 158BC of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was issued to him on June 13,1996. In response to the notice the said Abraham filed a return, declaring his undisclosed income at Rs. 1,50,000 on August 29,1996. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Investigation Circle-1, Trichur, after hearing the assessee's representative found that the assessee did not explain the sources of investment in properties and he did not adduce any reason for not filing the return in conformity with the declaration made under Section 132(4) of the Income-tax Act. Though the assessee requested to keep the proceedings abide till the petition filed...
Karunakaran N. Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-21-1999
Reported in: (2001)IIILLJ1386Mad
N.V. Balasubramanian, J.1. The writ petition is for the issue of a writ of certiorari calling for the records on the file of the Labour Court, Chennai, in I.D. No. 161 of 1987, dated November 13, 1990 and to quash the award passed by it.2. The writ petitioner was employed as a Junior Lab Assistant in the year 1971 in the second respondent company. According to the petitioner, on July 30, 1981, he was beaten by one V. Natarajan who was employed as chemist in the second respondent company and he reported the same to the supervisor and he gave two complaints against the said Natarajan on the same day, one to the General Manager and the other to Industrial Relations Manager. It seems that the said Natarajan also gave counter complaint against the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the second respondent instead of investigating both the complaints, proceeded to investigate the complaint given by the said Natarajan against the petitioner alone without taking any action on the complaint...
C.A. Abraham Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-21-1999
Reported in: [2000]109TAXMAN16(Mad)
ORDER1. A search was conducted in the residential premises of Shri C.A. Abraham (SR) on 14-12-1995. During the course of search, the officials had seized certain indiscriminating documents revealing the investments made by him in movable and immovable properties. It was also revealed that the assessee was doing business in benami names. So a notice under section 158BC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (herainafter referred to as 'the Act') was issued to him on 13-6-1996. In response to the notice, the said Abraham filed a return declaring his disclosed income at Rs. 1,50,000 on 29-8-1996. The Assistant Commissioner, Investigation, Circle 1, Trichur, after hearing the assessee's representative found that the assessee did not explain the sources of investment in properties and he did not adduce any reason for not filing the return in conformity with the declaration made under section 132(4) of the Act. Though the assessee requested to keep the proceedings aside till the petition filed by the a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »