Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Court: chennai Year: 1985 Page 8 of about 73 results (0.158 seconds)

Dec 02 1985 (HC)

The Authorised Officer (Land Reforms) Mayuram and anr. Vs. K.V. Balasu ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-02-1985

Reported in : (1986)1MLJ307

..... in paragraph 6, a further scale of compensation was introduced with the result that while under the tamil nadu 1961 act the minimum compensation receivable by the land owner was 9 times the net annual income, a further scale was provided for and the last part of the scale only provided for two times the ..... 10 times and the residuary clause (iv) provided for 9 times the balance of the net annual income as compensation. paragraph 6 reads as follows:the amount of compensation for the land acquired by the government under this act shall be determined in accordance with the following scale, namely-(i) for the first sum of rs ..... balance of the net annual income as the quantum of compensation. this section was brought into force on 21.12.1972.8. there are two more amendments which have some relevance. the tamil nadu act 7 of 1974 was passed by the tamil nadu legislature and though ..... of rs. 5,000 or any portion thereof of the net annual income from the land, 10 times such sum or portion;(iv) for the balance of the net annual income from the land, nine times such balance. the tamil nadu 1961 act was amended from time to time, one such amendment was made by tamil ..... . 5,000 or any portion thereof of the net annual income from the land, 12 times such sum or portion;(ii) for the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 29 1985 (HC)

Seerangamal (Died) and ors. Vs. E.B. Venkatsubramanian and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-29-1985

Reported in : (1987)1MLJ149

..... of any maintenance whatsoever. even if first plaintiff is held to be a permanent concubine, she would not be entitled to be maintained out of the income from the joint family property. in spite of the earlier proceedings, the present suit had been instituted. at the instigation of krishnasami iyer, who ..... to be unenforceable because it dealt with a joint family property. hence, for the reasons above stated, the presumption under section 111 of the evidence act comes into play and it is held that first plaintiff was the wife and plaintiffs 2 to 4 are the children of ranganatha iyer.26. plaintiffs ..... plea of defendants is that, marriage ceremony as claimed in para 12 of plaint having not been established, the presumption under section 114 of the evidence act cannot exist. failure to establish by legal evidence, about. ceremonies was due to the fact that they took place inside the family house and in ..... favour of legitimacy and frowns upon bastardy.11. gokal chand v. parvin kumari : [1952]1scr825 dealing with the scope of section 114 of the evidence act, it is held that continuous cohabitation, of a man and a woman as husband and wife and their treatment as such for a number of years, ..... and circumstances of this case does long continued cohabitation of ranganatha and first plaintiff lead to the presumption being drawn under section 114 of the evidence act?3. does the failure to prove marriage on 1.2.1933 preclude the first plaintiff from invoking the said presumption?4. is the suit property .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 08 1985 (HC)

P. Kamakshi Ammal, W/O. Late P. Venkatanarayanan Vs. P. Venkatesan and ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-08-1985

Reported in : (1986)1MLJ438

..... - the defendant has not proved that sufficient ancestral nucleus was available in the family and that the suit property has been purchased from out of the said income. so also it is not proved by kamakshi ammal - the defendant that the suit property has been purchased by late viswanathaiah from out of the sale ..... such that with its help the property claimed to be joint could have been acquired. a family house in the occupation of the members and yielding no income could not be a nucleus out of which acquisitions could be made, even though it might be of considerable value.31. kamakshi ammal - the defendant should ..... support and maintain, bangaramma was suffering from asthmatic attack daring the period may 1956. she had no independent legal advice and it was not her voluntary act. the defendant had executed settlement deed by exercising fraud and undue influence. bangaramma must have executed the will as well as the settlement deed without knowing the ..... genuine document and that she was not liable to pay any amount to the plaintiff venkatesan. the plaintiff venkatesan has filed urban land tax receipt (ex.a-13) to show the payment of tax to the suit premises. ex.a-14 is the intimation received from the corporation of madras intimating the change of house ..... tax registry in the name of the plaintiff-venkatesan. exs.a-16, b-2, b-3 and b-4 are all notices exchanged between .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //