Chennai Court June 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.
Commissioner of Gift Tax Vs. T. Abdul Wahid
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-17-1999
Reported in: [2001]117TAXMAN481(Mad)
Jayasimha Babu, J. The questions referred to us arise out of a demand for gift-tax consequent to the reconstitution of a firm, by which reconstitution, the share of the assessee was reduced and the shares allotted to another partner who was newly-inducted and to a minor to whom the benefits of the partnership were extended. The GTO regarded that reconstitution effected on 1-4-1971, as resulting in a gift from the assessee to Smt. P. Fareeda Begum, who was the newly admitted partner and to the minor Mohammed Akhtar, who was admitted to the benefits of the partnership to each of whom a 10 per cent share in the profits was allotted, as consequent to their admission, the profit-sharing ratio of the other partners was reduced. That view of the GTO was upheld by the Commissioner but was reversed by the Tribunal.2. The following questions have been referred to us at the instance of the revenue :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in cance...
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Petchi Muthu Asari and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-16-1999
Reported in: I(2000)ACC156; 2000ACJ1378; AIR1999Mad413; (1999)3MLJ154
M. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. The Oriental Insurance Company is the appellant herein. The appeal has been filed as against the Award of Rs. 75,000/-dirccting the Insurance Company as well as the owner of the vehicle, the third respondent herein, to pay the said amount to the claimants, the respondents 1 and 2 herein, challenging its liability to pay the compensation.2. The facts briefly are :-- The deceased Kannan, a Goldsmith, on 20-1-1988 at 3.15 p.m., was riding a Moped from South to North in Thiruchendur to Athur Road, keeping left side of the road. At that time, the lorry bearing Registration No. TNT 4359 driven rashly and negligently by the driver dashed against the deceased. The deceased was run over by the lorry and the Moped was severely damaged. The deceased died at the spot. The claimants being the parents filed M.C.O.P. No. 97 of 1988 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Sub-Judge), Tuticorin claiming a compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- from the owner of the vehicle and the...
Maragatham and ors. Vs. Managing Director, Thiruvalluvar Transport Cor ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-16-1999
Reported in: 2000ACJ1216; (1999)3MLJ165
M. Karpagavinayagam, J. 1. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, the claimants-appellants herein have filed this appeal seeking for enhancement. On 17.3.1991 one Purshothaman was riding his cycle at the extreme left side of the road. At that point of time, the bus belonging to the respondentCorporation proceeding from Madras to Trichy, being driven at excessive speed in rash and negligent manner came towards the left side and hit the cyclist from behind. As a result of the impact, he was thrown out from the cycle. He sustained head injury and multiple injuries and died on the spot.2. The claimants being the wife, minor children and the mother of the deceased respectively, filed a claim petition in O.P. No. 411 of 1991 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Principal Sub-Judge, Chingleput claiming a total compensation of Rs. 5,00,000 on the ground that the death of the deceased was due to the negligent driving of the driver of the bus belonging to the respond...
Dheeran Chinnamalai Transport Corporation Vs. Ammani and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-16-1999
Reported in: I(2000)ACC89; 2000ACJ589; (1999)IIMLJ722
M. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. These CM.A. No. 1107 of 1993 and Cross-objection No. 48 of 1995, arising out of a common judgment, are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Dheeran Chinnamalai Transport Corporation has filed the appeal in CM. A. No. 1107 of 1993 challenging the award passed in M.A.C.T.O.P. No. 1359 of 1990 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Trichy, directing the appellant to pay a compensation of Rs. 3,00,000 as against total compensation of Rs. 5,00,000 to the claimants on the ground of negligence and of quantum.3. The claimants/respondents in the appeal, being dissatisfied with the quantum of Rs. 3,00,000 have filed the Cross-objection No. 48 of 1995 seeking enhancement of compensation by requesting an additional sum of Rs. 1,50,000 restricting their claim to Rs. 4,50,000.4. The facts that are required for the disposal of the above matters are as follows:(a) Srinivasan, deceased in this case was practising as a lawyer in both civil and criminal case...
V. Maragatham and ors. Vs. Managing Director, Thiruvalluvar Trans. Cor ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-16-1999
Reported in: I(2000)ACC124; 2001ACJ1336
M. Karpagavinayagam, J. 1. Having been dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, the claimants-appellants herein have filed this appeal seeking for enhancement. On 17.3.91 one Purushothaman was riding his cycle at the extreme left side of the road. At that point of time, the bus belonging to the respondent Corporation proceeding from Madras to Trichy, being driven at excessive speed in a rash and negligent manner came towards the left side and hit the cyclist from behind. As a result of the impact, he was thrown out from the cycle. He sustained head injury and multiple injuries and died on the spot.2. The claimants, being the wife, minor children and the mother of the deceased respectively, filed a claim petition in O.P. No. 411 of 1991 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Principal Sub-Judge, Chingleput, claiming a total compensation of Rs. 5,00,000 on the ground that the death of the deceased was due to negligent driving of the driver of the bus belonging to the r...
Nesamony Transport Corporation Limited Vs. Chenthilathiapan and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-16-1999
Reported in: I(2000)ACC332
M. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. Nesamony Transport Corporation Limited, Nagercoil has filed this appeal challenging the award dated 30.4.1993 passed in M.C.O.P. No. 61 of 1988 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Subordinate Judge Court), Nagercoil, on the ground of negligence and of the quantum.2. The respondent Chenthilathiapan is the claimant. On 10.1.1988, the respondent was going on a cycle with his friend Ashokan, P.W. 2 through the branch road called Rajapathai, from North to South. When they came near the main road where the branch road joins, the bus bearing Registration No. T.M.N. 9167 belonging to the appellant Corporation came in a rash and negligent manner on the right side of the main road and dashed against the culvert on the Rajapathai and thereafter, hit against the claimant and his friend. Due to this accident, the claimant sustained fractures and multiple bleeding injuries. He was taken to hospital, where operation was conducted upon him. After discharge from the...
Madurai City Co-operative Housing Society Limited, No. A-2582, Represe ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-15-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)CTC407
ORDER1. Aggrieved by the award of the Special Tribunal for Co- operative Cases, Madurai, in C.S.No.171 of 1989 in so far as it relates to the rate of interest awarded in the judgment and decree at 6 per cent per annum from the date of decree, Madurai City Co-operative Housing Society Limited has filed the present writ petition for quashing the said decree and for direction to the respondents 2 to 4 to pay interest at the rate of 16 per cent per annum on the amount decreed till the date of realisation.2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are stated hereunder:Respondents 2 to 4 herein had executed a mortgage deed of their house infavour of the petitioner on 6.6.84 for a sum of Rs. 60,000 and received onlyRs. 42,000 on several dateS agreeing to repay the said sum together withinterest at 14 1/2 per cent per annum. The respondents 2 to 4 had to pay theprincipal amount of Rs. 42,000 together with interest of Rs. 14.285.54 as on15.4.87. Since they failed to pay the a...
Management of Coimbatore District Consumers Co-operative Wholesale Sto ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-14-1999
Reported in: [1999(82)FLR932]; (2000)ILLJ405Mad; (1999)3MLJ1
ORDERKarpagavinayagam, J. 1. The Management of Coimbatore District Consumers Co-operative Wholesale Stores Ltd., is the petitioner in this writ petition, seeking to issue a writ of ceruorari calling for the records of the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Coimbatore, the first respondent herein and quash his award dated November 16, 1989 passed in I.D. No. 284 of 1985.2. The facts leading to the filing of this writ petition could be summarised as follows:The petitioner is a co-operative society owning the Chinthamani Co-operative Super Market. One G.V. Rangarajan, the second respondent herein was working as a Superintendent in the super market. He was also incharge of the purchase of the empty covers required for packing of commodities. The total requirement of such empty covers are determined by the section manned by the second respondent under whom two other Assistants by name R. Jaganathan and V.M. Natarajan were working. In the matter of placing order by the section which was under ...
G.V. Rangarajan Vs. the Presiding Officer, Labour Court and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-14-1999
Reported in: (1999)3MLJ201
ORDERM. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. G.V. Rangarajan, the petitioner, herein, has filed this writ petition seeking to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent, viz., the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Coimbatore in I.D. No. 284 of 1985 and quash only that portion of the award dated 16.11.1989 published in Tamil Nadu Government Gazette No. 19-B, Part II, Section 2, dated 16.5.1990 by which 75% backwages has been denied to the petitioner and directing the second respondent to pay the full backwages together with all consequential benefits.2. The facts that are required for the disposal of the writ petition are as follows:(a) The petitioner joined the services of the second respondent the Management of Coimbatore District Consumers Co-operative Whole stale Stores Ltd. in the year 1959. He rose up from ranks and was promoted as the Superintendent of the Village Shop Programme Department from 1979. From March, 1980, he was given additional charge o...
Gummadi Industries Ltd., Habibulla Road Chennai-17 and Another Vs. Khu ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-11-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)ALD(Cri)738; [1999]98CompCas296(Mad); 1999CriLJ4246; 2000(2)CTC443
ORDER1. Crl.O.P.Nos.387 and 388 of 1999 and Crl.R.C. Nos.1242 and 1248 of 1998 are being disposed of in this common order as the issues and the parties are the same.2. The petitioners 1 and 2 are the accused in C.C.Nos.7157 and 7158 of 1998 on the file of the XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Madras arising out of the private complaint filed by the respondent for the offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.3. The petitioners in M.P. Nos.1003 of 1998 and 1004 of 1998, in both these cases, filed a petition before the trial court, to discharge the accused. The respondent filed a counter. After hearing the counsel for the parties, the learned XIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Madras dismissed these petitions. Aggrieved over these orders, these two revisions have been filed before this Court. This Court admitted both the revisions and ordered notice on 13.11.98.4. At this stage, the petitioners filed quashing applications in Cri.O.P.Nos.387 and 388 of 1999, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »