Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1975)IILLJ536Mad
..... after the de jure merger, the pondicherry civil courts act was enacted, which abolished the jurisdiction of the administrative court at pondicherry and directed that all cases pending before the said court shall be heard and disposed of by the district judge or the additional district judge in accordance with the procedure followed immediately before the commencement of the pondicherry civil courts act, 1966. ..... previously the orders of the administrative court, pondicherry went up in appeal to the conseil d' etat of france, but after the de jure merger, the appellate jurisdiction exercised by the conseil d' etat has been vested in this high court under section 10 of the pondicherry administration act, 1968. ..... i share, the wonder of the learned district judge how a person who entered the service of the municipality in the year 1938 could be presumed to continue as a temporary employee till the year 1965, that is to say, for 27 years, further, the very order of the mayor, by which the respondent was dismissed, expressly refers to the fact that the mayor's order was passed under article 14 of the arrete, which prohibits the mayor from inflicting the penalty of dismissal without getting the opinion of the disciplinary council. ..... by an order dated 30-3-1965 (vide exhibit al) the respondent was dismissed by the mayor for the following reasons:(1) that he was absent from his office during office hours. ..... he was dismissed on 30-3-1965. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... can be exercised by the magistrate before accepting the negative police report thereby acting on the protest petition by the victim or the de facto complainant. ..... when the said matter came up before a learned single judge, the learned judge referred the matter before a larger bench to answer the following question of law:- "whether the judicial act of acceptance of a referred charge sheet (negative final report) by a magistrate would have to be challenged and set aside before resort is had to further investigation under section 173(8) of cr.p.c.? ..... if it is judicial act, the concerned magistrate, who passes judicial order, cannot revoke the same in suo motu and the order of the magistrate has to be challenged before superior forum." 22. ..... and if that be so, the order passed by the magistrate in the proceeding before us must be characterized as a judicial act and therefore as one performed in his capacity as a court. ..... the reference made by the learned single judge is as to "whether the judicial act of acceptance of a referred charge sheet (negative final report) by a magistrate would have to be challenged and set aside before resort is had to further investigation under section 173(8) of the code of criminal procedure, 1973?" 22. ..... from a cursory look of the observation made by the hon'ble apex court it is easily discernible that if a magistrate accepts report of the police, act of magistrate must be construed as a judicial act. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... could be taken by him in the character as the legal representative and also, placing reliance upon the kist receipts standing in the name of the plaintiff and also the patta standing in the name of the plaintiff and the notice ex.a22 issued to the plaintiff by the department of urban land tax and the documents marked as ex.14 and ex.a15 as regards the complaint given to the police regarding the contesting defendants' unlawful interference in the plaintiff's possession and enjoyment of the suit properties and also with reference to the damage caused to the tomb of arumuga naicker ..... failed that he is legally entitled to take a new plea apart from the pleas taken by the 6th defendant in his character as the legal representative of the 6th defendant, as rightly put forth by the learned senior counsel for the appellants, inasmuch as no specific denial has been made in the written statement as regards ex.a2, as per law, by dw1, in particular, it could be seen that applying the proviso appended to section 68 of the indian evidence act, the plaintiff is not required to examine one of the attestors to the document for establishing its authenticity. 21. ..... the trial court has rightly found that even dw1 in his evidence has admitted that pw2, the plaintiff and dw1 used to go to school together and they had their curriculum in the same school from 1965 to 75. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... similarly, not making any provision to the testator's wife, namely, chinthamani aachi, in the will is also not a ground to suspect the will for the simple reason that the evidence available on record clearly shows that on the date of the execution of the will, his wife chinthamani aachi also executed another will and the same has been attested by the very same p.w.2 and p.w.3. ..... administer the property and credits of the deceased in any way concerned in the will by paying first his debts and then the legacies therein bequeathed so far as the assets will extend and to make a full and true inventory thereof and exhibit the same to the court within six months from the date of grant of letters of administration, with the will annexed and also to tender to this court a true account of the said property and credits within one year from the said ..... it is an admitted fact that initial burden always lies on the propounder to prove the execution as well as the attestation of will, as contemplated under section 63 of the indian evidence act and also testamentary capacity of testator. ..... alagappan in his evidence, clearly stated that he is the family friend of the testator from the year 1965. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... in so far as the 2nd item of the property is concerned, while the plaintiff claims over the property vide ex.a3, dated 31.10.1953, a sale deed executed by chenniappan in favour of chinnamalai gounder (plaintiff herein) in respect of 7.30 acres of land out of 14.60 acres and ex.a4, dated 25.10.1965, the sale deed alleged to have been executed by the legal representatives of rasayammal in favour of chennimalai gounder and his two brothers nachiappa gounder and marappa gounder in respect of remaining 7.03 acres of land out of 14.06 acres. ..... when the disputed transaction ex.b2 took place the law governing the minor's property was minority and wards act, 1890 and not the hindu minority and guardianship act, 1956. ..... it may also be that where the property belongs to the minor and not to a joint family, a guardian may act on his behalf and that way it may be stated that the minor is eo nomine a party to the transaction. ..... it is also to be borne in mind that the subsequent enactment of hindu minority and guardianship act, 1956 is not in substitute to the earlier act but only a supplement to the guardians and wards act, 1890. ..... the minor chenniappan, after attaining majority, ought to have challenged the validity of ex.b-2, within a period of limitation prescribed under article 65 of the limitation act, 1963. ..... it should be borne in mind that the transaction relied by the respondents is before enacting hindu minority and guradianship act, 1956. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... it is true that the actual management of the property was done by the appellant's father; but that would inevitably be so having regard to the fact that in ordinary hindu families, the property belonging exclusively to a female member would also be normally managed by the manager of the family; so that the fact that appellant's mother did not take actual part in the management of the property would not materially affect the appellant's case that the property belonged to her mother. ..... it is not possible to lay down a hard and fast rule, prescribing the quantitative limits of such a gift as that would depend on the facts of each case and it can only be decided by courts, regard being had to the overall picture of the extent of the family estate, the number of daughters to be provided for and other paramount charges and other similar circumstances. ..... it was the bad character of the first defendant, which forced the plaintiff to leave the marital home and not otherwise, as contended by the learned counsel for the first respondent. ..... loganatha mudaliar and another[air 1965 supreme court 271] held as follows: 8. ..... section 14 of the transfer of property act, 1882 says that 14. ..... regarding the substantial question of law, right in a immovable property worth above rs.100/- can be transferred only by a registered document as per section 17 of the registration act, 1908. ..... the settlement deed was never accepted or acted upon. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai Madurai
..... if a criminal trial or enquiry takes a long time, it is ordinarily not open to the court to interfere in case of suspension as it is in the exclusive domain of the competent authority who can always review its order of suspension being an inherent power conferred upon them by the provisions of article 21 of the general clauses act, 1897 and while exercising such a power, the authority can consider the case of an employee for revoking the suspension order, if satisfied that the criminal case pending would be concluded after an unusual delay for ..... in other words, it is to refrain him to avail further opportunity to perpetuate the alleged misconduct or to remove the impression among the members of service that dereliction of duty will pay fruits and the offending employee may get away even pending inquiry without any impediment or to provide an opportunity to the delinquent officer to scuttle the inquiry or investigation to win over the other witnesses or the delinquent having had an opportunity in office to impede the progress of the investigation or inquiry etc. ..... there cannot be any doubt that the rules 1965 are a self contained code and the order of suspension can be examined in the light of the statutory provisions to determine as to whether the suspension order was justified. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai Madurai
..... if a criminal trial or enquiry takes a long time, it is ordinarily not open to the court to interfere in case of suspension as it is in the exclusive domain of the competent authority who can always review its order of suspension being an inherent power conferred upon them by the provisions of article 21 of the general clauses act, 1897 and while exercising such a power, the authority can consider the case of an employee for revoking the suspension order, if satisfied that the criminal case pending would be concluded after an unusual delay for ..... in other words, it is to refrain him to avail further opportunity to perpetuate the alleged misconduct or to remove the impression among the members of service that dereliction of duty will pay fruits and the offending employee may get away even pending inquiry without any impediment or to provide an opportunity to the delinquent officer to scuttle the inquiry or investigation to win over the other witnesses or the delinquent having had an opportunity in office to impede the progress of the investigation or inquiry etc. ..... there cannot be any doubt that the rules 1965 are a self contained code and the order of suspension can be examined in the light of the statutory provisions to determine as to whether the suspension order was justified. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... of cease and desist, dated 9.12.2010, claiming exclusive rights in the word brite and threatened the plaintiff with civil and criminal proceedings against the use of the brand name reynolds brite, alleging that the defendant is the registered proprietor of the trademark brite in many classes, including class 16 and that they have been using the said mark for selling injection moulded plastic products from 1946 and the word brite had been invented and coined by them ..... the act of the defendant in issuing the cease and desist notice on the baseless claims is nothing but groundless threat of legal proceedings, done with the sole intention of harassing the plaintiff. ..... the division bench of delhi high court, had once again taken into consideration the decisions reported in air 1965 sc page 980 parle product's case, (air 1972 sc 1359) national bell company's case, (air 1971 sc page 898) and other decisions and held as follows:- "to sum up:- (1) the crucial tests to be applied for judging an infringement action or a passing off action in the field of medicinal and pharmaceutical preparations remain the same as are applicable to other goods. ..... it is seen that various organisations are using the word brite, including the organisations in paints and chemicals, scrub for utensils, home cleaning materials, gold jewels, reflective leashes and such other products. 7. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... under such circumstances, it could be seen that the onus of proving that the settlement deed dated 03.03.1965 is a valid document and that the same has been accepted and acted upon by the appellant, is on the appellant. 9. ..... therefore, absolutely, there is no material on the side of the appellant to show that the gift deed ex.b2 had been accepted and acted upon and that he had taken delivery of the possession of the suit properties pursuant to the same and that he has been in possession and enjoyment of the suit properties. ..... it is false to state that the settlement deed dated 03.03.1965 is an invalid document and it was never accepted and acted upon by the plaintiff vadivel pillai. ..... on 03.03.1965, subbaiah pillai and thillai ammal executed a registered settlement deed in favour of vadivel pillai, the plaintiff settling all their properties including the suit properties and the above said settlement deed was a true and valid document and accepted and acted upon. ..... the settlement deed dated 03.03.1965, on the basis of which vadivel pillai claims title to the suit properties, has been seriously impugned by the respondents. ..... certified copy of the settlement deed dated 03.03.1965 has been marked as ex.b2 and the certified copy of the settlement deed 14.05.1925 has been marked as ex.b1. ..... vadivel pillai claims title to the suit properties based upon the settlement deed dated 03.03.1965 said to have been executed in his favour by subbaiah pillai. .....
Tag this Judgment!