Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Sep-29-1967
Reported in : (1968)9GLR1087
..... irregularity in the exercise of jurisdiction, because the whole suit is basedupon ex. 3/1. the bond is defined in section 2(c) of the bombay stamp act, 1958.2. no doubt, this is an inclusive definition, but before a document can become a bond, a person executing the document must oblige himself to ..... question is not a bond.3. the learned counsel for the petitioner also relies on clause (2) to the proviso to section 3 of the bombay stamp act. but there is a finding of fact of the court below that on the evidence it is not possible to prove the identity of the ship. as ..... v.b. raju, j.1. in this revision application, the question relates to the order of the assistant judge of jamnagar ordering that the document, ex. 3/1, upon which the suit was based is liable to stamp duty of rs. 75/- together ..... in revision. but for the reasons given in the previous paragraph, the document is not a bond. the order passed by the learned assistant judge is set aside and the order passed by the trial court stands. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Nov-15-1967
Reported in : 1969CriLJ83; (1968)1MLJ304
..... one year under the former section, by the sub-divisional magistrate of ulundurpet. no separate sentence was awarded under section 337, indian penal code.. on appeal the sessions judge, south arcot, confirmed the conviction and sentence.2. the prosecution case is briefly this : on the night of 17th september, 1965 at about 3 a.m., p ..... be inadmissible. if the first information does hot amount to a confession, any admission made therein can be proved against the maker under section 21 of the evidence act, the supreme court in faddi v. state of madhya pradesh : 1964crilj744 , in dealing with the admissibility of first information report given by an accused before a ..... police officer observed as follows:admissions are admissible in evidence under section 21 of the indian evidence act. section 17 defines an admission to be a statement, oral or documentary, which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Aug-25-1967
Reported in : (1968)2MLJ21
..... state of mysore v. shivdbasappa : (1964)illj24sc , observed that the minimum that is expected where witnesses are not examined from the very beginning at the inquiry in the presence of the person charged is that the person charged should be given a copy of the statements made by the witnesses which are to be ..... cotton mills v. gangadhar : (1963)iillj371sc , and khardah & co. v. its workmen : (1963)iillj452sc , were rendered with regard to the disputes under the industrial disputes act. in the case of domestic enquiry by an institution like the life insurance corporation of india, the decision of the supreme court in state of mysore v. shivabasappa : (1964) ..... used at the inquiry well in advance before the inquiry begins. in khardah & co. v. its workmen : (1963)iillj452sc , the supreme court dealing with the case of workmen under the industrial disputes act expressed its opinion that it is desirable that all witnesses on whose testimony .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Nov-28-1967
Reported in : (1968)2MLJ221
..... of further pictures. had the management taken some action against the employee, short of an averment of misconduct, within the meaning of the act, and warned him or censured him, conceivably there would be no room for interference. but, where the management takes the responsibility to ..... level a charge of 'misconduct' which is the charge of some positive act, or of conduct which would be quite incompatible with the express and implied norms, of the relationship of the employee to the employer ..... not to permit the management to dismiss the employee for alleged misconduct under section 33 (2) (b) proviso of the industrial disputes act, 1947. at the outset a certain complication feature might be referred to. it appears that subsequent to the decision in this writ petition ..... m. anantanarayanan, c.j. 1. in our view, the learned judge (venkatadri, j.) was perfectly justified in declining to issue a writ of certiorari quashing the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Oct-23-1967
Reported in : (1968)2MLJ554
..... witnesses had found that necessary sanction was not obtained under the provisions of the madras panchayat act for prosecuting the petitioner and ultimately discharged the petitioner. against the order of the sub-divisional magistrate, the state filed a revision before the sessions judge, tirunelveli. the sessions judge held that the order of discharge by the sub-divisional magistrate must be deemed to be ..... as the offence alleged to have been committed was subsequent to the madras panchayats act xxxv of 1958 came into force. he further held that the sanction for prosecution should have been accorded under section 169 of the act xxxv of 1958. this order by the learned sessions judge was passed on 9th february, 1966.5. subsequently, on 28th september, 1966, the collector .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Aug-24-1967
Reported in : (1968)2MLJ544
..... representatives.2. in the meantime, one ramaswami chetty who obtained a decree in original suit no. 3 of 1965 on the file of the court of the subordinate judge, devakottai against the said murugappa chetty for a sum of over rs. 25,000 on 25th january, 1965, filed execution petition no. 86 of 1965 for recovery of the amount ..... his legal representatives. defendants 3 and 4 allowed the suit to be decreed ex parte. the other two merely put the plaintiff to proof of the claim. the learned subordinate judge who tried the suit held against the plaintiff and dismissed the suit. appeal suit no. 416 of 1967 has been preferred by the plaintiff unnamalai achi against the four legal ..... orderk.s. venkataraman, j.1. one unnamalai achi filed a suit original suit no. 44 of 1966 on the file of the court of the subordinate judge of devokattai, againstone murugappa chetty for recovery of a sum of rs. 26,560 on the basis that she had deposited a sum of rs 21,136-50 with murugappa .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Oct-31-1967
Reported in : (1968)1MLJ300
..... motive and was therefore fully justified. in the end, he dismissed the claim of the first respondent. on appeal to the co--operative tribunal, salem (district judge, salem), the learned tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the deputy registrar. the tribunal has observed that if the bay-law is not ..... respondent ample time and opportunity to make the construction. but she deliberately postponed the construction of the building. in such circumstances, the board of directors have acted within their rights in canncelling the allotment made to her and re-allotting the plot to the second respondent herein.6. for the foregoing reasons, the writ ..... 1962.3. thereupon, the first respondent filed an arbitration claim before the deputy registrar of co-operative societies, salem, under section 51, of the madras cooperative societies act, 1932. he found that the first respondent vidated bye-law 37(b) of the society, in the matter of the construction of the house, that the resolution .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jul-27-1967
Reported in : (1968)2MLJ463
..... issue was framed reading as under:whether this court has no jurisdiction and the suit is not maintainable as per the provisions of madras act xxvi of 1963.2. the learned subordinate judge held that the court had jurisdiction. sri r. kesava ayyangar appearing for the petitioners states that the order is wrong and that the ..... a patta it would take effect from the date of the notification. as pointed out by veeraswami and krishnaswami reddy, jj., in mustafa v. udayanchiammal : (1968)2mlj58 .. the issue of patta is in recognition of the title that inhered before the notified date and continued to inhere in the landholder thereafter to the private ..... statutory tribunals. rajamannar, c.j., and ganapatia pillai, j., in adakalathmmal v. chlnnayan panipundar : air1959mad447 , while considering section 56 (1), a similar provision in conversion into ryotwari act (xxvi of 1948), held, approving the ratio in soosai udayar v. andiyappan (1959) 1 m.l.j. 195 : , agreed that (at page 317):if the relief .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Aug-14-1967
Reported in : [1968]69ITR812(Cal)
..... but from that of a businessman. the yardstick is that of a prudent businessman. the reasonableness or the unreasonableness of the amount distributed as dividends is judged by business considerations, such as the previous losses, the present profits, the availability of surplus money and the reasonable requirements of the future and similar others ..... this section was introduced to prevent exploitation of juristic personality of a private company by the members thereof for the purpose of evading higher taxation. to act under this section the income-tax officer has to be satisfied that the dividends distributed by the company during the prescribed period are less than the statutory ..... the assessment year 1955-56 and 1956-57 were small within the meaning of the expression smallness of profits in section 23a of the indian income-tax act, 1922, and that any further declaration of dividend than that declared by the assessee would be unreasonable ?'since the decision of the tribunal, the supreme .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Nov-28-1967
Reported in : 1969CriLJ1082; (1968)2MLJ515
..... their statement on any point should not be accepted without great caution and sound judicial reasons for accepting as true anything they have said. the learned judge has also observed that some times this principle has been interpreted in particular cases to mean that sound judicial reasons are absent unless there is independent corroboration ..... on the records of the case under section 288, criminal procedure code can be made use of to corroborate a retracted confession. the principle that a retracted confession cannot be acted upon, in the absence of corroboration in material particulars, is referred to in that decision. the decision in queen empress v. bharmappa i.l.r. (1889) ..... is not adhered to by the witness in the sessions court, should not be lightly admitted by virtue of section 288, criminal procedure code and it can be acted upon as substantive evidence only if the court is completely satisfied that it is true. in the bench decision of the travancore-cochin high court in narayana .....
Tag this Judgment!