Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rationale Court: chennai Year: 1970 Page 1 of about 7 results (0.080 seconds)

Dec 03 1970 (HC)

Venkitammal and anr. Vs. Janaki Ammal

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-03-1970

Reported in : (1971)1MLJ366

..... the fixation of upset price by the court does not affect the rights of parties and that it is not a judicial act but merely an administrative one. but the rationale of that decision cannot be applied to the facts of this case where the decree-holder has been given permission to bid even in the first sale contrary to the .....

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

..... to day, then a fresh offence is committed on every day on which the act of omission continues.justice sadasivan of the kerala high court has approved and followed the rationale of these two decisions. applying this test, there is no difficulty in holding that the respondent-accused was committing a ' continuing offence' from 13th april, 1967, the date of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 10 1970 (HC)

General Assurance Society Ltd. Vs. Sitarama Rice Mill Co. and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-10-1970

Reported in : [1971]41CompCas162(Mad); (1970)2MLJ483

sadasivam, j.1. sri sitarama rice mills company are the owners of the factory building wdh godowns at dosapadu, krishna district. on 19-1-1960, they insured the factory and machinery with the jupiter general insurance company ltd., the first defendant in the suit, against loss or damage that, may result by fire or lightning for one year between 1-1-1960 and 1-1-1961. one kodali venkatasubba rao took a lease of the factory with the machinery from the plaintiffs and sub-leased the same to one venkineni venkataratnam. venkineni venkataratnam in his turn sub-leased the proper-ty to one kotes-wara rao, the third defendant in the suit. the plaintiffs filed o.s. no. 44 of 1958 on the file of the subordinate judge's court, gudivada, against their lessee, venkatasubba rao and others, and obtained an injunction against the lessee from sub-leasing the property. the plaintiffs' case is that their lessee, venkatasubba rao, had no right to sub-lease or assign his interest and more so after they had obtained an injunction order in o.s. no. 44 of 1958, on the file of the subordinate judges' court, gudivada. the third defendant also insured the factory and machinery against loss or damage as a result of fire or lightning with the general assurance society ltd., on 11-11-1959 for one year. on 31-i-i960, the plaintiffs' factory was destroyed by a fire accident and the plaintiffs claimed the assured amount of rs. 50,000 under the policy taken by them from the first defendant. the surveyor of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 30 1970 (HC)

P. Shankar Rao Vs. the Government of India, Represented by the Home Se ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Oct-30-1970

Reported in : (1971)1MLJ302

orderk.s. venkataraman, j.1. this petition has been filed by one thiru shankar rao under article 226 of the constitution to issue a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 11th august, 1969 of the government of india compulsorily retiring him from the indian administrative service. the impugned order reads as follows:in pursuance of the powers conferred by sub-rule (3) of rule 16 of the all india services (death-cum-retirement benefits) rules, 1958, the president in consultation with the government of tamil nadu, is pleased to order the retirement of thiru p. shankar rao, who has already attained the age of 55 years from indian administrative service cadre of tamil nadu, in public interest, on the expiry of three months from the date of service of this orderthe first respondent in the petition is the government of india and the second respondent is the government of tamil nadu. the petitioner who was born on 12th may, 1914 was appointed as probationary deputy collector of the madras civil service in 1942 and was promoted to the indian administrative service in 1955. he served as collector of the nilgiris district. thereafter he was transferred and was, working as accommodation controller. he was then served with ten charges arising mainly out of his conduct when he was working as collector of the nilgiris. he was suspended pending enquiry. a board of enquiry consisting of thiru m. anantanarayanan, i.c.s., district judge (as he then was) and thiru t.a. verghese, i.c.s., .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 01 1970 (HC)

L.Palaniappan Vs. the Additional Registrar, (Marketing, Planning and D ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-01-1970

Reported in : 2000(3)CTC46

order1. the writ petition is for the issue of writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the proceedings of the first respondent made in of 1990/sf-1 dated 21.2.1991 and of 1989 sf-a dated 26.4.1990 and that of the second respondent made in of 1982 (g) dated 11.4.1986 and of 1982 (g)-a dated 30.9.1985 and quash the same. 2. the case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as junior supervisor in the co-operative central bank kumbakonam and was posted at kolapadu village of thiruthuraipoondi taluk, thanjavur district. thereafter he was transferred to the thiruvaimoor agricultural co-operative credit society as the secretary and as on the date of filing of the writ petition he was working as secretary. aymoor primary co-operative land department bank, aymoor. vedaranyam taluk, thanjavur district. according to the petitioner, while he was working as secretary in the thiruvaimoor agricultural co-operative credit society, on the direction of the then minister 'for co-operation, the deputy secretary, co-operative department of government of tamil nadu by letter dated 12.12.1981 directed for an enquiry to be conducted into the affairs of thiruvaimoor agricultural co-operative credit society. the special officer of the kumbakonam central co-operative bank issued a memo dated 20.1.82 to the marketing officer to conduct the enquiry and submit his report within three days. on 25.2.82 the report of the enquiry officer was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 07 1970 (HC)

Workmen of Ruby Works Ltd. Vs. Ruby Rubber Works Ltd. and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-07-1970

Reported in : (1970)IILLJ204Mad

ismail, j.1. this is a petition under article 226 of the constitution of india for quashing the award dated 24th february, 1968, and made in industrial dispute no. 49 of 1966 passed by the presiding officer, labour court, madras. on 29th september, 1965, the management served a memo of charge on the workers in question and the substance of the charge was that they hooted and mocked at messrs. alex manuel, personnel officer, j. mathew, production in-charge, and o.p. nambiar, security officer, when they were going out of the factory on 28th september, 1965, at about 5 p.m. on their way to home by uttering abusive, false, malicious and vulgar slogans from the main gate of the factory till the thangam soda bus stop and that they induced other workers of the factory also, who were there striking work, to do similar acts. the charge memo indicated that such a conduct was misconduct under rule 13 (xxxiii) and (xxxvii) and the workmen concerned were required to submit their explanation. ultimately, an enquiry was conducted. at the enquiry, the workmen concerned were found guilty of the charge levelled against them and on the basis of that finding, they were dismissed from service. it is this dismissal that gave rise to the dispute before the labour court, on reference being made by the government. before the labour court, several contentions were advanced on behalf of the workmen and the labour court, after considering them, rejected those contentions and came to the conclusion that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 03 1970 (HC)

In Re: Devakumar and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-03-1970

Reported in : (1972)1MLJ200

b.s. somasundaram, j.1. the first two appellants are brothers. the other two appellants are their sisters. they were residing at no. 2, aheyapuram first street, kodambakkam, which is at a distance of 50 yards from the nehru nursery-school. the first two were prosecuted under section 3 (1) and the other two under section 7 (1) of the suppression of immoral traffic in women and girls' act. the prosecution arose in the following circumstances. p.w. 5, thiru pappa, the assistant commissioner-raw-special officer under the suppression of immoral traffic act had information that the appellants were running a brothel at their aforesaid residence. he made arrangements for a trap on the evening of 17th august, 1968. p.w. 4, a pawnbroker, residing in de mello's road, perambur barracks, was fixed as a decoy. m.o. 1 series (five 10 rupee currency notes) were entrusted to him with instructions to accompany the informant to the brothel house and to have sexual intercourse, after payment of the amount to one of the girls whom he might choose. p.w. 4 did it. the time was then 3 p.m. the informant introduced him to the first appellant, who was seated in a chair in the main hall. the latter demanded payment at the rate of rs. 50 per hour for intercourse with any one of the prostitutes who were in that house. p.w. 4 agreed and handed over the amount to him. the first appellant asked the second appellant to fetch the girls. the other two appellants were brought from a room to the hall. on being .....

Tag this Judgment!

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