Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: partition act 1893 section 5 representation of parties under disability Court: chennai Year: 1970 Page 1 of about 3 results (0.105 seconds)

Aug 07 1970 (HC)

Varadammal and anr. Vs. Ambalal J. Vyas and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-07-1970

Reported in : AIR1971Mad371; (1971)1MLJ65

..... the question then arose how far this principle could be applied, when the suit for partition was instituted not by a major but by a minor acting through his next friend. the view was expressed that as the minor had under the law, no volition of his own, the rule in question had no application ..... latter is the natural resultant from his decision, the division and separation of his share, which may be arrived at either by private agreement of the parties or, on failure of that, by intervention of the court. once the decision has been unequivocally expressed and clearly intimated to his co-sharers, his ..... with the view to injure the opponent, and there can be no question of its having been initiated as the result of an understanding between the parties. while in collusive proceedings the combat is a mere sham in a fraudulent suit it is real and earnest.'thus there being a vital and ..... it is unreal, and the decree passed therein is a mere mask having the similitude of a judicial determination and worn by the parties with the object of confounding third parties. but when a proceeding is alleged to be fraudulent, what is meant is that the claim made therein is untrue but that ..... for purposes of family necessity but also far his own antecedent debts.'in sat narain v. rai bahadur sri kishendas , the privy council had to consider the scope of sub-section (2) of section 52 of the presidency towns insolvency act. in that context, the privy council pointed out--'turning to the first contention of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 10 1970 (HC)

K. Ishaq Sheriff Saheb Vs. Mumtaz Begum and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-10-1970

Reported in : (1971)1MLJ362

..... and paid a court-fee of rs. 200 thereon. he also valued the relief of partition at rs. 33,324-25 under section 39(2) of the said act and the relief of mesne profits at rs. 1,000 under section 44, and paid a court-fee of rs. 200 and rs. 75.50 respectively in respect of those ..... of the property illegally withheld by one of the heirs, an administration suit was not a proper remedy. as in this case, there also the parties were muslims and one of the heirs claimed exclusive possession of the property on the basis of an alienation made by the deceased whose estate had to ..... properties and that on account of some misunderstandings between him and his son, his son has executed a nominal sale deed in favour of a third party. it is on those facts the court held that the plaintiff need not ask for cancellation of the alleged sale deed executed by his son which ..... demanding a fee for it. nor can i see any force in the argument that the position is altered by the joinder in the suit of the parties to the transactions who are interested in supporting them.... i am unable therefore to appreciate the argument that, by reason of his impleading the several creditors ..... taking that view. ramaswami v. rengachari : air1940mad118 , was a case in which certain alienations made by managing member of the family were attacked. by virtue of some alienations possession of the properties had been given to the alienees, and in respect of some others the plaintiff therein was eo nominee a party. in the third set .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 15 1970 (HC)

The Accommodation Controller, Madras Vs. G. Rukmani Ammal

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-15-1970

Reported in : AIR1971Mad342

..... of a part of the building, the choice of a tenant in respect of the part of the building should be left to him. cases have not infrequently arisen under the old act where the accommodation controller has thrust upon a landlord a tenant of a religious persuasion and practices different from those of the owner. who was also occupying the building ..... because the owner of it is keeping a room locked, it does not become a case of occupation of the building by the owner for the purpose of section 3(10)(c) of the act. with due respect, we are unable to agree with this view. occupation may, no doubt, be physical, but it does not follow that the owner should actually ..... section (10)(c), though his attention was drawn to it. srinivasan j, quashed this order.2. the learned judge proceeded upon the footing that the petitioner herself ..... be actual physical occupation all the time. the respondent was occupying a portion of the building belonging to her, the rest of the portion being under tenancy. on termination of the tenancy in once portion of the first floor. the accommodation controller, purporting to act under section 3(3), allotted that portion to a tenant of his nomination. he declined to give effect to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 05 1970 (HC)

The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Board of Revenue, Madras Vs. ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-05-1970

Reported in : AIR1970Mad348

..... release by one person in favour of another, who is not already entitled to the property as a co-owner."5. chief controlling authority v. patel, which, like board of revenue v. murugesa mudaliar, fb, was under the stamp act, took a similar view. both these cases related to release of a co-owner's right in favour of ..... life interest in the property.2. there is no dispute before us that as a partition the document has been certrectly stamped. the only question is whether the document, in so far as it operated for the mother giving up her life interest ..... , 1959, which followed an arbitration relating to the family properties of the respondent, his father and his son and to which the respondent's mother was party, purported to divide the family properties in accordance with the terms of the award. the document also dealt with the property that was the subject-matter of ..... -such a release is for consideration does not make any difference to its character as such. that much is clear from the reference under the stamp act, s. 46, (1895) ilr 18 mad 233(fb).3. the essential difference between a conveyance and a release lies in the fact that, in ..... sum was charged on some other property specified in the document. the document described itself as a partition and was stamped as such. but the revenue considered that it was a composite document partly serving as a partition and partly as a conveyance in so far as it related to the mother giving up her .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 1970 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. K.S. Ratnaswamy

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-24-1970

Reported in : [1970]78ITR303(Mad)

..... the family, have a coparcenery interest accruing by birth in the ancestral property; that this coparcenary interest carries with it the inchoate right to raise an action of partition, and that until partition is de facto accomplished these same persons have a right to maintenance. it seemes clear that this right is an inherent quality of the right of coparcenary--that is ..... is an instrument bonafide entered into between the parties.4. in the above circumstances, the assessee filed returns for the assessment years 1952-53, 1953-54, 1956-57 and 1957-58, for the first two years, after proceedings were initiated under section 34(1)(a) of the income-tax act, 1922, hereinafter referred to as ' the act', and for the later two years on his ..... (a)(ii) is the only aspect which has to be considered in the case and not any other limb of section 4a of the act. relying mainly upon zackariah sahib v. commissioner of income-tax, : [1952]22itr359(mad) and ramjibliai hansjibhai v. income-tax officer, ahmedabad, : [1964]53itr547(guj) (guj.) mr. balasiibrahmanyan contends that the assessee being a member of the joint family has ..... facts and their cumulative effect we are hesitant to disturb the concurrent findings of fact of the appellate assistant commissioner and the tribunal.14. reliance is placed on zackanah sahib v. commissioner of income-tax, where viswanatha sastri j. observed as follows:'the expression 'maintains a dwelling place' connotes the idea that the assessee owns or has taken on rent or .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 19 1970 (HC)

Central Camera Co. (P.) Ltd. Vs. the Government of Madras

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-19-1970

Reported in : [1971]27STC112(Mad)

..... that section 36(3)(a)(iii) provides that in disposing of an appeal the appellate tribunal may, after giving the appellant a ..... ramaprasada rao, j.1. the assessee, messrs central camera company (private) limited, dealers in photographic materials at no. 35/4 mount road, madras, was subjected to assessment under the central sales tax act for the assessment year 1960-61. the assessing officer was the additional commercial tax officer iv, south madras. when the accounts of the assessee were called for and checked, it ..... should also be considered as a disputed turnover, ought to have been entertained by them and the remitting order should have included this amount as well. he refers to section 36 of the madras general sales tax act, 1959, in support of his contention.3. when an assessee voluntarily gives up a portion of his claim before the hierarchy of tribunals constituted ..... the madras general sales tax act, 1959, could be of any assistance to him. section 36 deals with appeals to the appellate tribunal. it is common knowledge that an appeal is a creature of statute and if the appellate tribunal hears an appeal under a jurisdiction specially created by the provision of a statute, then it has to act under it. the argument, however, is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 02 1970 (HC)

Bodi Reddy Vs. Appu Goundan

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jul-02-1970

Reported in : (1970)2MLJ577

..... he assents to, what is a violation of his rights, and that the person to whom such representation is made should be ignorant of the other party's rights, and should have been deluded by the representation into thinking that his wrongful action was assented to by the other party.this view was reaffirmed by the rangoon high court in poozundaung bazaar co. ltd ..... the specific relief act it cannot be contended that an injunction must necessarily be granted against a trespass under all circumstances, for in exercising its discretion the court cannot exclude all consideration of the extent of damages which would be caused to either party by refusing or granting the injunction.since phillips, j., was confirming the decree of the district judge, under section 98. code ..... . v. ellerman's arracan rice and trading company limited i.l.r.(1934) rang. 200.40. thus it will ..... no tort-feasor or wrongdoer is entitled to ask a court to sanction his wrongful act by purchasing the plaintiff's rights by assessing damages in that behalf.20. coming to the authorities in india, govind venkaji kulkarni v. sadashiv dharma bhat and anr. i.l.r.(1893) 17 bom. 771, is a case where the plaintiff sued for a declaration of his .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 03 1970 (HC)

The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Madras Vs. B.A. Mallaya

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-03-1970

Reported in : AIR1971Mad210

..... coparcener, where for instance he purports to alienate his share and justice has to be done between him and a third party or even as between the coparceners.the essence of a partition, as we mentioned, is that the asset in co-ownership as it where, as in the case of a coparcenary, ..... mysore high court held that the document amounted to partition. we are in entire agreement with the ratio of this case.7. we are of opinion, therefore, that the document in question is a partition deed chargeable to duty under art. 45 of the indian stamp act, and the question referred to us is accordingly answered ..... property and what was given to the two brothers as share was something which had nothing to do with the family properties.6. in nanjunda setti v. state of mysore, air 1964 mys 124 (sb), the facts were more or less similar as in the instant case before us. in that ..... release which was executed in january 1967 between the same parties. the deed contained a recital that the properties belonged to the joint family and then the following--"it was considered desirable and in the interests of good relationship and harmony to partition the assets of the joint family. sanjeev mallayya and ..... chiefcontrolling revenue authority v. r. n. patel, fb. it seems to us that in neither of these cases, the point that actually arises for decision in this reference was considered. in the first of them, the parties charged with the stamp duty had themselves agreed that the document was a release falling under art. 44 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 14 1970 (HC)

State Public Prosecutor Vs. Vilakku Syed Ismail Natchi

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jul-14-1970

Reported in : (1970)2MLJ552

..... issued notice for the removal of the said encroachment. she did not comply with the notice issued for the removal of the encroachment. p.w. 1 prosecuted her under section 181 of madras panchayat act. she admitted the offence in the court of the sub-magistrate, tiruchendur on 17th june, 1967. on 19th august, 1967 p.w. 1 issued through p.w. 3 ..... expressly authorised in this behalf by the panchayat, panchayat union council, executive authority or commissioner, but nothing herein shall affect the provisions of the code of criminal procedure, 1898 (central act v of 1898), in regard to the power of certain magistrates to take cognizance of offences upon information received or upon their own knowledge or suspicion:provided that failure to take ..... date of conviction during which he continues so to offend, with fine which may extend to the amount mentioned in that behalf in the fourth column of the said schedule.5. the averment in exhibit, p-1, that the respondent-accused constructed house encroaching the panchayat land on 13th april, 1967 is not disputed, i.e., the date of the commencement ..... 234 square feet is a continuing offence within the meaning of the proviso to sections 166 and 181 (2) (c). the expression ' continuing offence' has been defined in the following terms by a division bench of the bombay high court consisting of gajendragadkar and shah, jj. in state v. bhiwandiwalla : (1956)iillj153bom .the expression 'continuing offence' though not a very happy expression .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 03 1970 (HC)

Easwaran Chettiar Vs. K. Subbarayan

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-03-1970

Reported in : AIR1971Mad163

..... . on the finding that the landlord was carrying on retail business at no. 50 bunder street, he will be disentitled to the benefits under section 7(3)(a)(iii) of the act (corresponding to section 10(3)(a)(iii)of act 18 of 1960), as he is not a person not occupying for purposes of a business a non-residential building. the learned counsel for ..... , west thanjavur, the court allowed the revision petition by agreeing with the rent controller, and directed eviction. the matter came before kailasam, j., and the learned judge, after hearing the parties made the following order:"the question that arises in this civil revision petition is whether the landlord who is carrying on his business both manufacture and retain sale of oil ..... was not occupying for the purpose of a business which he is carrying on, a non-residential building of his own. subba rao, j., (as he then was), in thanappa v. govindaswami, put theproposition in a must stronger way thus:--"in the case of a non-residential building the landlord can evict a tenant only if he is not in possession ..... well as retain sale. the provision prima facie therefore will not apply.mr. ratnam, learned counsel for the respondent, strongly relied on a decision of this court in abdul khader v. hussain ali by the 1962-2 mad lj 446. the facts as found by the court of small causes and accepted by the learned judge are that the respondent in .....

Tag this Judgment!


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