Chennai Court April 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.
Sailesh Chandrakant and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-05-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)CTC749; II(1999)DMC137
ORDER1. Petitioners are husband and wife. They have filed this C.R.P.No. against the order passed by the Sub Judge, Poonamallee, dismissing their application I.A.S.R.No. 9671 of 1998 to receive the affidavit of the second petitioner in substitution of her oral evidence.2. The facts necessary for the disposal of this C.R.P. are as followed.The petitioners filed a joint petition H.M.O.P.No.21 of 1998 under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, praying for the dissolution of their marriage by mutual consent. Thereafter, the first petitioner was ready to submit himself for an oral evidence on the expiry of the six months period prescribed under Section 13-B, whereas, the second petitioner was not available for giving evidence in the enquiry. Hence, both of them filed affidavits. The second petitioner prayed to receive the affidavit in substitution of her oral evidence. The learned Judge rejected that application. The C.R.P. is against this order.3. According to the learned counsel for th...
Marudhu Pandiyar Transport Corporation Vs. Arul Kulandhai and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-05-1999
Reported in: 2001ACJ219
V. Bakthavatsalu, J.1. This appeal is directed against the award passed by Motor, Accidents Claim Tribunal (Sessions Judge, Ramanathapuram) in M.C.O.Ps. No. 647 of 90. The first claimant is the husband of the deceased Susaiammal and claimants 2 and 3 are minor son and daughter of the deceased.2. The case of the claimant is that on 31 -8-89 at about 11.00 a.m. the deceased was travelling in the respondent's bus bearing registration No. TML 6063 from Kodaranthal to Paramkudi and that when the bus stopped near Krishna theatre, the deceased was alighting from the bus and at that time, the driver of the bus drove the bus in a rash and negligent manner, as a result of which the deceased fell down and sustained Injuries and that she was taken to Government Hospital, Paramakudi and then the Madural Rajaji Hospital where she succumbed to injuries and that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the respondent bus driver. The claimants have claimed compensation of Rs. 3,09,600...
Thanjavur District Co-operative Central Bank, Ltd. (Rep. by Its Specia ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-05-1999
Reported in: (2000)IIILLJ1143Mad
N.V. Balasubramanian, J. 1. The award of the Labour Court ordering reinstatement of the second respondent with 50 per cent back-wages is the subject matter of the writ petition. The second respondent was employed as a Manager in the petitioner-bank and according to the petitioner, while he was working as Manager he had committed certain misconducts such -(i) obtaining leave on fictitious grounds while he continued to engage himself in his own business; (ii) obtaining a signature from a customer and using the signature to take an amount of Rs. 2,500 on the fixed deposit of the customer without the knowledge of the customer; (iii) indulging in activities which resulted in a bad reputation for the bank ; and (iv) acting in a manner resulting in loss of confidence among the public; etc. The petitioner embodying the above charges, issued two charge memos, dated March 4, 1977 and April 16, 1983 and after getting the explanation submitted by the second respondent, found that the explanation ...
S.P. Viswanathan Vs. Sub-divisional Magistrate and Sub-collector and a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-05-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ4285
ORDERM. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. S.P. Viswanathan the petitioner herein calling himself as a private practitioner in the field of alternative medicine and allopathic medicine having his private practice at two places at Tirupur in the name and style of Vijay Clinic, having aggrieved over the impugned order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and Sub-Collector, Tirupur, Coimbatore District dated 5-10-98 under Sections 133 and 141, Cr.P.C. directing the closure of the petitioner's clinics, has filed this application for quashing the said order under Section 482, Cr.P.C.2. According to the petitioner, he is a member in a registered association known as Private Modern Medical Practitioner Association, having its registered office at Old Washermanpet, Chennai. At the instance of one Indian Medical Association, Tirupur, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and Sub-Collector, Tirupur, the first respondent herein, initiated proceedings against the petitioner and passed a conditional order for stopp...
C.P. Chikkanna Chettiar (Deceased) and anr. Vs. Tamil Nadu State Trans ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-1999
Reported in: 2001ACJ979; AIR1999Mad457
M. Karpagavinayagam, J. 1. This is an appeal filed by the claimant challenging the judgment and decree passed in M.C.O.P. No. 854/1987 on the file of the 11 Additional District Judge, Salem dated 10-8-1989.2. The claimant, Chikkanna Chettiar filed a petition under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs. 1,25,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident that took place on 17-8-1987 at about 11.30 a.m. due to the negligent driving of driver of the Bus belong to respondent Corporation. The Tribunal on consideration of the materials though rejected the claim of Rs. 1,25,000/-found that the claimant is entitled to Rs. 10,935/- out of the total amount of compensation of Rs. 22,870/- since the claimant himself contributed 50% negligence to the accident. This Award is being challenged in this appeal on the ground that there is no material to establish that there was contributory negligence on the part of claimant.3. During the pendency of this appe...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. A.R. Balaraman (Decd.) and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-1999
Reported in: [2000]242ITR470(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.1. The question referred to us at the instance of the Revenue is :'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the firm which gets the articles manufactured through others could be regarded as an industrial undertaking for the purpose of Section 5(1)(xxxii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ?'2. The assessment years are 1973-74 to 1978-79.3. Section 5(1)(xxxii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, refers to industrial undertaking which is defined in the Explanation to it as including, inter alia, the business of manufacturing or processing.4. The assessee is a firm which on its own account, does not own any manufacturing facility, but purchases articles like silk yarn and gets silk cloth manufactured through weavers and then sells the cloth on its own account. The firm makes use of the facilities owned by the weavers who on their own machines weave the material supplied by the assessee and receive the consideration for that service from the assessee for making the finis...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. K. Rajagopalan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-1999
Reported in: (2000)158CTR(Mad)466; [2000]241ITR829(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.1. The questions referred to us, at the instance of the Revenue, are :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the second proviso to Section 23(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal was justified in allowing the claim of loss of the asses-see in respect of new residential unit ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the word 'income' referred to in the second proviso to Section 23(1) could refer to only the annual value and not the 'income' after the deduction admissible under Section 24 ?' 2. The assessee had claimed the benefit of the deduction under Section 24 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, after computing the annual value in accordance with Sections 22 and 23. The result of such computation was loss of Rs. 23,451. The assessment years are 1974-75 to 1976-77. Section 25 of the Act as it stood prior to its amendment in 1984 at the end of the second ...
Somu and Somu Vessels Merchant Anupparapalayam Vs. C. Arumugham
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-1999
Reported in: (1999)2MLJ623
V. Bakthavatsalu, J.1. The plaintiff is the appellant. The plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of the amount.2. The case of the plaintiff is as follows:The defendant was having dealings with N. Somasundaram and K. Somasundaram who were doing business in partnership in the manufacture and sale of vessels under the name and style of Somu and Somu. The other partner K. Somasundaram retired from the partnership and a new firm was formed under the name and style with another partner S. Navaneetham. As per the document of the dissolution of the former firm, the amount owing by the defendant alongwith other items was assigned in favour of the new firm. Hence, the suit is instituted by the present plaintiff. The defendant was purchasing vessels and was having dealings with the new defunct firm from 11.4.1973 till 31.3.1980 and as per accounts maintained by the plaintiff, a sum of Rs. 5391.11 is due by the defendant. The defendant has not paid the amount inspite of repeated demand. The plaint...
Jathavan and ors. Vs. the Special Commissioner and Commissioner for La ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-1999
Reported in: (1999)3MLJ185
ORDERT. Meenakumari, J.1. The writ petition is for the issue of writ of certiorari to call for the records of the first respondent authority made in his D.Dis. No. K.P.P. No. 4/90, dated 28.6.1990 and quash the same.2. The dispute in this writ petition relates to the lands in Ayanavaram village comprised in T.S. Nos. 12 and 27. The case of the petitioners is that their mother purchased the property in question under 4 different sale deeds all before the year 1948 i.e., before the Act XXVI of 1948 came into force. However, there were rival claimants by Chandrasekaran and Jegathambal who also applied for a patta in respect of the lands in question. It is also the case of the petitioners that during the final settlement enquiry in Ayanavaram village in respect of T.S. Nos. 12 and 27 and other survey numbers, the claim of the petitioners was rejected and an extent of 0.62 cents was held to be as water spread poromboke. It is also their case that their mother Chinnammal filed a revision pet...
Nesamony Transport Corporation Vs. Sasidaran Nair
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-1999
Reported in: I(2000)ACC71
M. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. Nesamony Transport Corporation, the appellant herein challenging the award dated 11.11.1991 passed in M.C.O.P. No. 154 of 1989 granting compensation of Rs. 45,000/- to the respondent herein, has filed this appeal.2. Mrs. Kala Ramesh, the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant, attacking the impugned award, would submit that both the findings with reference to the permanent disability and quantum of compensation are wrong, as the appreciation of the evidence was not done by the Tribunal in the proper perspective.3. Heard Mr. N. Paul Vasanthakumar, the Counsel appearing for the respondent.4. The claimant filed an application claiming compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- for the grievous injury sustained on his leg on 12.3.1988 due to the accident, since the bus belonging to Nesamony Transport Corporation hit against him.5. The Tribunal after recording evidence found that the claimant is entitled to the compensation of Rs. 45,000/- on various heads, as the neglige...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »