Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: punjab municipal act 1911 Court: chennai Year: 1974 Page 1 of about 4 results (0.050 seconds)

Aug 02 1974 (HC)

Gulab and Company and anr. Vs. Superintendent of Central Excise (Preve ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-02-1974

Reported in : [1975]98ITR581(Mad)

..... statutory remedy does not affect the jurisdiction of the high court to issue a writ. but, as observed by this court in rashid ahmed v. municipal board, kairana : [1950]1scr566 the existence of an adequate legal remedy is a thing to be taken into consideration in the matter of granting writs ..... to whom the money or asset belonged. 13. the decisions in motilal's case and laxmipat choraria v. k. k. ganguli were followed by the punjab high court in ramesh chander v. commissioner of income-tax, , commissioner of income-tax v. ramesh chander and tarsem kumar v. commissioner of income-tax ..... coimbatore, in his proceedings dated february 5, 1973, dropped the proceedings initiated by him against gulab and company under section 132(5) of the act. 8. the learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the whole proceedings initiated under section 132 are illegal and that the said provision could not have ..... a reasonable belief that the amount seized was the second petitioner's undisclosed income, issued a warrant under section 132 of the income tax act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the act'), on november 6, 1972, authorising the income-tax officer, trichy, who is the 4th respondent herein, to seize the said sum of ..... of these cases reliance has been placed on the decision in gian chand v. stateof punjab : 1983(13)elt1365(sc) , in that case, with reference to the presumption under section 178-a of the sea customs act, 1878, and the burden of proof in respect of an article which was originally seized .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 29 1974 (HC)

P. Somasundaram Vs. K. Rajammal

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-29-1974

Reported in : (1976)2MLJ444

..... the plaintiff had not taken any appropriate proceedings to set aside the said will, exhibit b-34. the defendant also pleaded that she is paying municipal tax from the year 1951 and attending to all the repairs, that the plaintiff is estopped from claiming the suit properties by his own laches, ..... his aunt, mst. mandu, whether his sons were not entitled to succeed to the property. following the decision in bhagabati v. kalicharan i.l.r. (1911) cal. 468, it was held that the nephew dulichand took a vested interest in the properties, which-was transmissible to his heirs. in phillip graham greenwood ..... the above-said supreme court case. moreover, in this case we are directly concerned with the applicability of the statutory provisions of the indian succession act to the terms of the will wherein the intention of the testator to confer an absolute vested interest on velammal is clearly made out. so, ..... were certain, velammal had acquired a vested interest in the properties on the death of the testator seeni chettiar, section 119 of the indian succession act clearly applies. in the absence of any contrary contention by no stretch of imagination can it be said that exhibit a-1 created only a ..... velammal, she also acquired a right to enjoy the properties along with piramu ammal and chellammal. so, under section 119 of the indian succession act, the vested interest in the suit properties had devolved on velammal on the death of the testator subject to the charge of maintenance in favour of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 30 1974 (HC)

R. Swaminathan Vs. Annammal

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jul-30-1974

Reported in : (1975)1MLJ328

..... representatives.7. the learned judge who decided the case reported in swaminathan v. annammal (1970) 83 l.w. 767, relied on the decision of the punjab high court reported in shiela rani v. durga pershad . there in pursuance of an order for maintenance made under section 488, criminal procedure code, the accrued arrears had ..... the view of the same high court in an earlier case, that is, the one reported in asad ali mollan v. haider ali i.l.r. (1911) cal. 13 : 69 i.c. 826.11. that was a case where there was a decree for maintenance in favour of a mohamadan lady for ..... but a right to future maintenance, is however, not property, which may be transferred by virtue of the amendment to section 6 of the transfer of property act, by the addition of clause (dd), where it is provided that 'a right to future maintenance, ' in whatsoever manner arising, secured or determined, cannot ..... code of civil procedure, says that a right to future maintenance is not attachable this is analogous to section 6 (dd) of the transfer of property act, which says that a right to future maintenance cannot be transferred. the question is whether the appellant in the present case is attaching a 'right to ..... decree obtained by the appellant herein. the appellant is no other than the stepson of the respondent. in an original petition under the hindu marriage act between the respondent herein and her husband (father of the appellant), the court ordered the husband to pay periodically a certain sum to the respondent .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 21 1974 (HC)

Mohammed KarimuddIn (Died) and ors. Vs. the State of Madras Represente ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jun-21-1974

Reported in : (1975)2MLJ396

..... of the corporation funds is not in dispute in this case. but what is stated by mr. thillai villalan is that such expenditure was incurred at the instance of the municipal councillor and that it was not a regular expenditure. he would, however, admit that the expenditure was budgeted and that the said budget was forwarded to the government which ultimately ..... such exercise of power is arbitrary and capricious as it is based on irrelevant material. as pointed out by the supreme court in s. pratap singh v. the state of punjab : (1966)illj458sc :where an authority exercising a power has taken into account as a relevant factor something which it could not properly take into account, the exercise of the power ..... has been withdrawn. this apparent error, therefore, necessarily justifies judicial interference under article 226 of the constitution.13. the next question is whether section 48 (1) of the land acquisition act should be literally interpreted and understood. no doubt, the contention of the learned advocate general that as physical possession has not been taken by the state, the jurisdiction of the ..... department, in their memorandum no. 158236 s.i/60-11 dated 13th february, 1962 have stated as follows:while submitting the draft declaration under section 6 of the land acquisition act, in respect of certain lands required for neighbourhood projects, the collector of madras has brought to the notice of government the requests of the families affected by acquisition, for alternative .....

Tag this Judgment!


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