Court : Chennai
Decided on : Mar-08-1996
Reported in : (1997)ILLJ756Mad; (1996)IIMLJ164
ORDER1. These three writ petitions arise from a common question between the same parties.2. Ale main relief sought for is to quash the Award of the second respondent dated May 27, 1994 whereby it declared that the workmen of the Indian Overseas Bank Staff Canteen be treated as employees of the Bank and they be paid on par with Class IV staff.3. The material facts which necessitated the filing of these writ petitions are as follows : The Central Office of the Indian Overseas Bank at Madras has got canteen for its employees. As per Ex. M-1, on November 25, 1972, the - Indian Overseas Bank, petitioner herein, acceded to the request of All India Overseas Bank Employees' Union to float a society in the name of 'I.O.B. Staff Co-Operative Canteen'. As regards the terms and conditions, the Bank agreed to supply free of cost, premises, furniture, utensils, electricity (other than fuel), upto a maximum of Rs. 500 per mensem to meet the cost of fuel against production of relative bills, and water...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jan-29-1996
Reported in : [1999]236ITR872(Mad)
Thanikkachalam, J. 1. Pursuant to the directions given by this Court, in TCP No. 417/79 dt. 14th September, 1980, the Tribunal has referred the following question for our opinion under s. 27(3) of the WT Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that s. 35 of the WT Act, 1957 cannot be invoked in the assessee's case for the asst. yr. 1972-73 ?' 2. In the asst. yr. 1972-73, the WTO in his order dt. 31st May, 1975 under s. 35 of the Act, added a sum of Rs. 45,700 as a liability due by the assessee to the Life Insurance Corporation, omitted to be disallowed in the original assessment made on 20th February, 1973 wherein such liability has been allowed as a deduction. According to the WTO, rectification is possible, since the liability in question being secured and (sic-against) the life insurance policies in respect of which no wealth tax was chargeable, had been wrongly allowed and the m...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Apr-26-1996
Reported in : 1996(1)CTC547
ORDERP. Sathasivam, J.1. Plaintiff in O.S. No. 2432 of 1979 on the file of District Munsif, Turaiyur, is the appellant in the above second appeal. She filed the said suit for declaration that she is also a heir to the deceased Moorthy to receive the amount of gratuity, family pension and other amounts to be disbursed by the Tamil Nadu Government and the amount to be disbursed by the Life Insurance Corporation of India and for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants 2 to 4 from disbursing the said amounts.2. The case of the plaintiff as found in the plaint are as follows:- One Moorthy, the son of the plaintiff and the husband of the first defendant was employed as a police constable in Thanjavur East Police circle. The said Moorthy died in harness on 31.7.79. The plaintiff and the first defendant are the only legal heirs of the deceased Moorthy. According to the plaintiff, Tamil Nadu Government disburses Rs. 10,000 as family benefit fund, the gratuity and pension to the heirs ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Aug-20-1996
Reported in : 1997(1)CTC695
..... (subsidiary banks) act, 1959 (central act 38 of 1959);(d) a corresponding new bank constituted section 3 of the banking companies (acquisition and transfer of undertakings) act, 1970 (central act 5 of 1970)(e) the industrial finance corporation of india, established under the industrial finance corporation act, 1948 (central act 15 of 1948), the life insurance corporation of india, established under the life insurance corporation act, 1956 (central act 31 of 1956), the unit trust of india, established under the unit trust of india act, 1963 (central act 52 of 1963), the ..... trade in art silk yarn, raw silk cotton yearn, art silk cloth, silk cloth and cotton cloth is clearly advancement of an object of general public utility. but the real difficulty arises when we turn to consider the applicability of the second condition. what do the words, 'not involving the carrying on of any activity for profit' mean and what is the nature of the limitation they imply, so far as the purpose of advancement of an object of general public utility is concerned? and ..... which the excess vacant land according to the respondent is 43 grounds 0840 sq.ft.28. the point for consideration is whether the excess urban land owned by the petitioner trust for running the school is exempt by virtue of operation of section 20(1 )(iv) of the tamil nadu urban land (ceiling and regulation) act, 1978. section 20 falls in chapter iii of the act dealing with ceiling on vacant land. section 20 says that chapter iii not to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Nov-19-1996
Reported in : (1997)1MLJ123
AR. Lakshmanan, J.1. The writ appeal is preferred against the order dated 22.8.1996 in W.P. No. 18785 of 1992, allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent and quashing the communication dated 28.12.1989 of the Personnel Manager of the appellant bank expressing their inability to keep the offer of appointment open favouring the respondent on her attaining the age of majority, and directing the appellant to provide a suitable job to the respondent in any existing vacancy or any future vacancy as expeditiously as possible.2. In order to appreciate the controversy between the parties, the following facts require to be noticed. The respondent is the first daughter of late N. Narayana Pillai, who was working in the appellant bank. He died on 29.6.1984 while in service. The respondent's mother, who is working in the Fisheries Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, approached the appellant seeking a job on compassionate basis for the respondent. The respondent's mother was intimated by t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Aug-22-1996
Reported in : (1998)IIILLJ1038Mad
ORDERD. Raju, J.1. The respondents Authorities of the Food Corporation of India, Madras, in W.P. No. 7863 of 1986 are the appellants in the above Writ Appeal which has been filed against the order of the learned single Judge dated April 26, 1996 allowing the Writ Petition and granting certain specified reliefs in the light or the subsequent development in the case.2. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are that one late Varadhan who was working as a Picker under the second appellant died on October 13, 1984 and thereafter the writ petitioner, said to be the wife of late Varadhan claimed for the settlement of the terminal benefits due to her deceased husband by sending a notice dated November 6, 1984 to the first appellant herein through her counsel. The writ petitioner was referred by the first appellant to the second appellant for further course of action and the second appellant by his communication dated February 7, 1985 called upon the writ petitioner to produce a ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Aug-14-1996
Reported in : [1998]91CompCas385(Mad)
N. Arumugham J.1. The suit against the defendant is to recover a sum of Rs. 3,66,830 with interest at 19.5 per cent. from the date of plaint with costs. 2. The brief facts of the case as gathered from the plaint are stated hereunder : 3. The first plaintiff is the nationalised banking institution which provided every financial assistance to the second plaintiff, a registered partnership firm carrying on the business of running a boat engaged in fishing in the sea. The defendant, incorporated under the General Insurance Act, is an insurance company in which, both the plaintiffs have taken an insurance policy for the fishing boat of the second plaintiff, which was named Sealark-I. Thus, the second plaintiff is the customer of the first plaintiff who availed of various loan facilities and thereby purchased the mechanised fishing boat by name Sealark, engaged in fishing off the east coast sea. The said vessel had been insured in order to protect the same with its interest and damage to the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Aug-13-1996
Reported in : (1997)1MLJ103
S.S. Subramani, J.1. Defendant in O.S. No. 435 of 1976, on the file of the District Munsif s Court, Tuticorin, is the appellant.2. Suit filed by plaintiffs is one for declaration of title and recovery of possession.3. It is said that the plaint schedule property originally belonged to the father of the defendant. On the death of the defendant's father, his right devolved on his two sons, namely, Ramiah Pannaiyar and Subbiah Pannaiyar (defendant). He had also a daughter by name Poongani Ammal. The appellant (defendant) and his brother obtained release of the right of Poongani Ammal and, therefore, the appellant and his brother became the absolute owners of the property. A partition was effected between the defendant and Ramiah Pannaiyar and the plaint property was allotted to the share of Ramiah Pannaiyar. Defendant was given some other property. First plaintiff purchased the plaint property as a vacant site from Ramiah Pannaiyar as per sale deed dated 16.5.1974. After purchase, he put ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Oct-23-1996
Reported in : (1997)1MLJ100
ORDERAR. Lakshmanan, J.1. The landlady who succeeded before the Rent Controller but lost before the appellate authority is the petitioner in this revision.2. The landlady filed R.C.O.P. No. 15 of 1989 on the file of the Additional District Munsif/Rent Controller, Ambasamudram, for eviction of the tenant on the ground of wilful default in payment of rent from January, 1989. According to the landlady, in spite of the notice, the rent was not paid by the tenant and that the tenant has sent a reply containing false allegations. The tenant contended that the property originally belonged to one Ulagammal and that the present landlady has purchased it by sale deed dated 27.4.1987. The tenant further contended that she has paid an advance of Rs. 5,000 to Ulagammal and that at the time of sale, it was agreed that the tenant should continue to pay the original rent of Rs. 50 and that the advance should only be refunded when the tenant vacates the property. The learned Rent Controller allowed the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jan-19-1996
Reported in : (1996)ILLJ849Mad; (1996)IMLJ523
ORDERAr. Lakshmanan, J.1. The prayer in W.P, No. 18969 of 1994 is to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to regularise the services of the petitioners in their respective categories as they are working now in the service of the Indian Council of Medical Research, CJIL Field Unit or any other unit before the expiry of the last extended period of March 31, 1994 to March 31, 1995 with continuity of service and statutory service entitlements and benefits.2. The prayer in W.P. No. 15648 of 1995 is to call for the records of the respondents in CFU/Scheme/ESTT/94-95/83 dated March 27, 1995 in respect of the petitioners and quash the same and to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to regularise the service of the petitioners in their respective categories in the Indian Council of Medical Research, CJIL Field Unit or any other unit with continuity of service and all the entitlements and benefits.3. The petitioners were recruited by the Central Jalma Institute for Le...
Tag this Judgment!