Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1970Mad331; (1970)ILLJ299Mad
ORDERKailasam, J.1. W. P. No. 504 of 1989 is filed by an employee of the Indian, Overseas Bank Ltd., Madras and W. P. No. 505 of 1969 by an employee of the State Bank of India, Madras, for the issue of writs of mandamus to strike down the provisions of Section 36-AD of the Banking Laws (Amendment) Act 1968, as unconstitutional and illegal.2. The Government of India introduced in Parliament Banking Laws Amendment Bill on 23-2-1967. The Bill mentioned several objects for its introduction, viz., (1) to snap or at least to make ineffective the link between a few industrial houses and the banks, (2) to change the exclusive orientation of the Banks towards industry and business and to reorient credit facilities to several priority sectors such as agriculture, small scale industries, rural finance, cooperation and exports, (3) to arrest monopolistic trends of the investment of funds of the Banks and misdirection of bank's resources, and (4) to ensure that the credit decisions of the managemen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1952Mad565; (1952)1MLJ514
1. In these two applications some of the provisions of the Cotton Textiles (Control) Order, 1948, were challenged as being opposed to certain articles of the Constitution of India. This order was made by the Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946. It came into force on 2nd August 1948 in the place of an earlier order of February 1948. Two classes of special officers to work the provisions of this order are contemplated. One is the controller who is the principal officer appointed by a provincial Government for the administration, of the textile control and the other is the Textile Commissioner appointed by the Central Government. This order provides for the control of raw materials and stores as well as cloth and yarn. In these two applications we are only concerned with the provisions relating to cloth and yarn. Clause (12) of the order runs as follows:"12 (1) No producer who has no spinning plant shal...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1971Mad309
1. Petitioner is the plaintiff in O. S. No. 267 of 1966, on the file of the District Munsif's Court, Srivilliputtur. The respondent, the Madras State Electricity Board, found on inspection of the plaintiff's premises on 3rd July 1958 and 1st December 1964 that seven lights of 40 watts each had been connected with power service in order to have the benefit of lower tariff. The test reports Exs. B-3 and B-4 were disputed by the petitioner on the ground that the signature of P.W. 1, its Managing partner, were obtained on blank forms. But the courts below negatived the said contention and relied on the test reports and the evidence of the Junior Engineer examined as the sole witness on the side of the Board. There is no ground to interfere with the findings of fact in this respect.2. The learned advocate for the petitioner, however, urged that there is no proof that the lights were burning, apart from the evidence of D.W. 1, the Junior Engineer, who made the inspection on 1st December 1964...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 1994(71)ELT884(Mad)
ORDERA.R. Lakshmanan, J. 1. In these batch of Writ Petitions, the validity of Notification No. 140 of 1981 dated 2-7-1981 issued under Rule-8 sub-rule (1) of Central Excise Rules, 1944 is in question.2. By the said notification, the petitioners who are manufacturers of matches without aid of power have been denied the concessional rates of excise duty which they were entitled to in terms of an earlier Notification No. 42 of 1981. The petitioners in these Writ Petitions have therefore questioned the amendment issued under the impugned notification.3. In order to appreciate the questions involved and raised in these Writ Petitions, it is necessary to set out a few relevant facts also to trace briefly the history of the excise duty levied on matches. Excise duty was levied on matches for the first time in 1934. Upto 1948-49, match factories were classified for the purpose of excise into two types viz., industries producing not more than 100 gross boxes per day and rest with a higher outpu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1995Mad329
ORDERRaju, J.1. These two writ petitions have been filed by the very same petitioner who, during the relevant period of time, was the Editor of 'Ananda Vikadan' a Tamil weekly having its registered Office at No. 758, Anna Salai, Madras-2. W.P. No. 4203 of 1987 has been filed for a writ of declaration, declaring that the Resolution passed by the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly dated 4-4-1987 sentencing the petitioner to three months rigorous imprisonment as unconstitutional, null and void, illegal and unenforceable. W.P. No. 4202 of 1987 has been filed for a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to compensate the petitioner for the alleged flagrant violation claimed to have been committed of the petitioner's fundamental rights on account of imposing of a rigorous imprisonment for three months.2. The controversy between the parties hereto has its origin centering around a cartoon published on the outer wrapper rather the front cover page of the Tamil weekly 'Ananda Vikadan' bearing...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 1995CriLJ2771
1. The petitioner was the third accused in C.C. No. 306 of 1993 on the file of the Special Judge (Sessions Judge designated under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985), Madurai. 2. He, on trial, for refraction or violation of Section 8(c) punishable under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Act No. 61 of 1985 - as amended by Act No. 2 of 1989 - for short 'NDPS Act') was found guilty, convicted thereunder and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years and a fine of one lakh of rupees, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three years. 3. Aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, he preferred Appeal No. 319 of 1994 on the file of this Court. Along with the said appeal, he also filed the present petition praying to suspend the sentence so imposed on him and release him on bail, pending disposal of the appeal. 4. On this petition, notice had been ordered to the State represented by the Intelligence Officer, Directora...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1957Mad427
Ramaswami, J. 1. This criminal revision is directed against the conviction and sentence of the learned Fifth Presidency Magistrate, Madras, in C. C. No. 10098 of 1955. 2. The facts are: The revision petitioner, Alavandar, is the keeper of the Jana Sakthi press at No. 38 Mount Road, Madras-6. It was found from two pamphlets entitled 'Madras Preparatory Committee 5th World Festival of Youth and Students for Peace and Friendship' and its Tamil equivalent, that the petitioner had failed to print on them the name of the printer and the press as required under Section 3 of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867, and Rule 2 of the rules framed under Section 20 of the said Act, Therefore the Chief Presidency Magistrate filed a complaint under Section 12 of the aforesaid Act. 3. The statement of this Alavandar was that he was the keeper of the Jana Sakthi press, that the pamphlets in question were printed at the said press, that the name of the printer and the person as required under Se...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1967Mad77; 1967CriLJ205
Natesan, J. (1) This revision case arising out of a proceeding before the Additional First Class Magistrate, Madurai, under S. 488(1), Cri P.C. comes before us, as the matter has been referred to a Bench in few of the conflict of case law and marked divergence of opinion between various High Courts and even in decisions of the same High Court on the question whether the word 'child' in S. 488(1), Cri P.C. in the context means a person of tender years or a person who has not attained the age of majority, that is, person under nonage or expresses only the relationship of a person as the immediate issue of a parent, without reference to age.(2) The application which has given rise to the proceeding was filed by one Amirthammal, the petitioner, herein, of Melapannagaram, Madurai, against her son Marimuthu claiming maintenance for two children of Marimuthu, a son named Balakrishnan and a daughter Ramanujam, both of whom are living with her. It is seen from the order of Court below that the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [1975]98ITR316(Mad)
Ramanujam, J. 1. The assessee who was carrying on business as a bus operator, formed a private limited company under the name of P. S. S. Transport (Private) Ltd. on March 31, 1959. He transferred 20 buses belonging to him to the company on July 1, 1959, for a total consideration of Rs. 2,58,604 which was the written down value of these buses in the assessee's accounts. On July 1, 1959, the amount of Rs. 2,58,604 was credited to his account in the company's books and later on Rs. 90,000 out of the said amount was adjusted towards the shares allotted to him and the balance together with the value of the sundry assets sold by him aggregating to Rs. 1,83,133 continued to his credit in the company's accounts.2. The assessee, his wife and two of his close relatives were the shareholders in the company. The assessee held shares to the value of Rs. 90,000 while the paid-up capital of the company was Rs. 1,00,000. The Income-tax Officer, in the income-tax assessment for the assessment year 196...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
1. The Original Side Appeal arises out of the decree and judgment dated 25.09.2008 in C.S.No.783 of 2000 in and by which the learned single Judge declared the Proceedings of the Managing Director of Tamil Nadu Housing Board in No.S4/45202/95 dated 19.04.1996 fixing the final cost to the allotments made in favour of members of the Plaintiff Association as null and void and also granting permanent injunction restraining the defendants from demanding the final cost as per the said proceedings. 2. After the disposal of the suit, the Plaintiff Association had filed writ petition W.P.No.9768 of 2010 seeking for a writ of mandamus to direct the Tamil Nadu Housing Board to issue sale deeds in favour of the members of the Plaintiff Association. On being stated by the respondent/plaintiff, the Writ Petition was posted along with the Original Side Appeal and heard together. By consent of appellants and respondent, both the appeal and writ petition are disposed of by this common judgment. 3....
Tag this Judgment!