Chennai Court December 2002 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.
B.S. Nagarajan Vs. K.B. Sivasankaran
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-10-2002
Reported in: (2003)1MLJ426
Prabha Sridevan, J.1. The appellant was granted a 60 year lease on 07-05-1949 by the trustee of the respondent-temple. A suit was filed in 1979 for recovery of possession by the respondent. The appellant resisted the suit and inter alia claimed the benefits of the City Tenants' Protection Act, 1921('the Act' in short). The suit was dismissed on the ground that the respondent is not entitled to recover possession of the suit property before the stipulated lease period. The learned Single Judge, however, held that the respondent-temple was governed by the provision of the Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 (1959 Act in short) or the Madras Religious Endowments Act, 1927 (1927 Act in short) and the lease granted without the sanction of the Board was invalid and that 'at the most, while he can say that he is not a trespasser..', he has no legal status as a tenant. Alongwith this appeal, the learned Single Judge also disposed of the revision filed by the appellant herein agai...
The Commissioner of Gift-tax Vs. D. Nagrirathinam
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-10-2002
Reported in: (2003)182CTR(Mad)643; [2004]266ITR342(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J.1. This is a reference under the Gift Tax Act, 1958, and in pursuance of the direction of this Court, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has stated a case and referred the following questions of law for our consideration:-1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and also had valid materials in holding that transaction by which a self-acquired property of the assessee was alienated in favour of her son by way of a partition deed is only a family arrangement and therefore, is outside the purview of the Gift-tax Act? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and also had valid materials in holding that the transaction by which the assessee leased out the properties to her husband and two daughters at a lease rent which is far below the annual income of the property is only a family arrangement and is outside the purview of the Gift-tax Act?2. The a...
G. Rajamani Vs. Petchimuthu,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-10-2002
Reported in: (2003)1MLJ432
ORDERR. Balasubramanian, J.1. Originally there were six respondents. However, the records show that respondents 2 to 6 had been given up. Therefore the revision survives only against respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 1 had been served and he is neither appearing in person nor engaged any counsel.2. Normally in exercise of the power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, I would not have interfered with the order passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai in R.P. No. 21 of 2001, as there is a further remedy available under the Consumer Protection Act before the National Commission. But at the same time, it must be noticed that mere availability of an alternative remedy does not by itself disable this court from exercising the power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, if a glaring injustice is brought to its notice. This court is fully aware that it has no unlimited prerogative to correct all species of hardship or wrong decisions made within ...
Tvl. P. Samiyaappan and Co. Vs. Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal R ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-10-2002
Reported in: [2003]130STC44(Mad)
ORDERK. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. In this case, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner Mr.Ramani put in issue the correctness of the order dated 12.9.2000 passed by the Special Tribunal in Tax Case Appeal No.2390 of 1997, whereby the Special Tribunal rejected the petitioner's claim of exemption from tax on a turnover of Rs.6,02,140/- on the basis of the notification No.II(1)/Rev/386(g)/74 dated 4.3.1974 issued under Section 17(1) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, which granted exemption in respect of the tax payable by any dealer under the said Act on the sales turnover of firewood.2. Mr.Ramani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner attacked the order on the ground that 'Karuvelan wood' sold by the petitioner pursuant to its agreement dated 31.3.1988 is nothing but firewood and as such the petitioner is entitled to the exemption under the above notification. Though the user theory adopted by the Special Tribunal and the authorities below to non-suit the benef...
Mrs. Varadammal, Vs. Metropolitan Transport Corporation Limited, Repre ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-10-2002
Reported in: (2003)1MLJ471
A.K. Rajan, J. 1. This appeal is filed by the claimants/legal representatives of the deceased Kandaswami against the award dated 2.3.1994 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Chief Judge-in-charge), Madras in MCOP. No. 2822 of 1990. 2. According to the claimants, Kandaswami was running Sri Saravana Agencies and dealing in Typewriters, Colour Television etc. He was aged about 24 on the date of the accident viz., 14.6.1990. The claimants are his mother, father, widowed sister and her children. They filed petition for compensation claiming Rs.6 lakhs. To prove the claim, the claimants examined four witnesses and marked Exs.P1 to P12. On the side of the respondent, one witness has been examined. Considering the oral and documentary evidence produced, the Tribunal found that the respondent's driver was guilty of negligence and hence awarded the compensation of Rs. 80,000/-. Aggrieved by this, the claimants have preferred this appeal. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the claimants ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Tarapore and Co.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-10-2002
Reported in: (2003)185CTR(Mad)476; [2003]264ITR61(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J.1. These are references on the basis of the directions of this court under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (herein referred to as 'the Act'), and the question of law referred to us reads as under :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to deduction under Section 32A on the plant and machinery used in construction work ?'2. Though there are three tax case references, the assessment year involved is common, viz., 1982-83. The Assessing Officer completed the original assessment of the assessee for the assessment year 1982-83 and allowed the investment allowance claimed by the assessee under Section 32A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the plant and machinery employed in construction work. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Tamil Nadu, Chennai-34, exercised the revision power under Section 263 of the Act and held that the assessee was engaged in the construct...
Cit Vs. T.A.S. Chellayya
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-10-2002
Reported in: [2003]260ITR211(Mad)
N. V. Balasubramanian J. In pursuance of the directions of this court, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has stated a case and referred the following question of law for our consideration :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and had valid materials to hold that the interest amount received by the assessee in respect of additional compensation awarded by court, should be assessed on accrual basis only, and, accordingly, the interest due for the year alone should be assessed for the assessment year 1982-83 ?'The assessee is an individual. Certain lands belonging to the assessee as coowner along with his brothers were acquired by the Government of Tamil Nadu in 1966. The assessee received additional compensation in the year 1981 and also the interest on the compensation. The Income Tax Officer was of the view that the entire interest received in the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1982-83 must be assessed and...
Cgt Vs. D. Nagrirathinam
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-10-2002
Reported in: [2003]129TAXMAN822(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J.This is a reference under the Gift Tax Act, 1958, and in pursuance of the direction of this court, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has stated a case and referred the following questions of law for our consideration :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and also had valid materials in holding that transaction by which a self-acquired property of the assessee was alienated in favour of her son by way of a partition deed is only a family arrangement and therefore, is outside the purview of the Gift Tax Act ?2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and also had valid materials in holding that the transaction by which the assessee leased out the properties to her husband and two daughters at a lease rent which is far below the annual income of the property is only a family arrangement and is outside the purview of the Gift Tax Act ?'2. The a...
Govindasamy Vs. Ravi,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-05-2002
Reported in: (2003)1MLJ253
K. Gnanaprakasam, J.1. This is an appeal by the claimant.2. The claimant, as an heir to the estate of Venkatachalam, who died in the motor accident, which took place on 28.5.1989, made a claim of Rs. 1,00,000/-. 3. In the claim petition, it is stated that the deceased is the claimant's father's brother's son. But, in the evidence, the claimant had deposed that the deceased Venkatachalam is his brother's son and they are living as a joint family and the properties were not divided among themselves. It is also stated that the parents of the deceased died while he was young and even thereafter, they were all living together. The respondents have denied the relationship claimed by the claimant to the deceased and further stated that the definition of 'legal representatives' as stated in CPC are applicable to the Motor Vehicles Act also and the claimant is a Hindu and therefore, the Hindu Succession Act would be applicable. 4. The claimant, in the petition, has stated that the deceased is h...
Thiru. T. Shanmuga Mudaliar Vs. Tmt. Noorjahan,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-05-2002
Reported in: [2003(97)FLR175]; (2003)ILLJ776Mad; (2003)1MLJ366
Prabha Sridevan, J.1. The driver of the bus belonging to the appellant in L.P.A. No. 72 of 2002 and insured by the appellant in L.P.A. No. 141 of 2002 died on 23-09-1995. A claim was made by his legal representatives (the respondents herein) under Section 10(1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act on the ground that the death was caused because of the heavy strain due to the employment. The Workmen's Compensation claim Commissioner awarded compensation but only against the insured/ employer. The learned Single Judge, allowed the civil miscellaneous appeal filed by the employer holding that the Insurance Company is jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. Against that these appeals have been filed. 2. The liability to pay compensation has been resisted on the ground that no materials have been placed for consideration such as the FIR, the post mortem certificate for ascertaining the cause of death, nor any proof of the salary particulars. There cannot be any dispute that if th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »