Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rationale Court: chennai Year: 1977 Page 1 of about 9 results (0.019 seconds)

Apr 29 1977 (HC)

Nestle's Products (India) Ltd. Vs. P. Thankaraja and Anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-29-1977

Reported in : AIR1978Mad336; (1978)1MLJ417

..... the grant of registration after full inquiry, should not be admitted in evidence at this stage. i am not able to sustain this objection to reception of this evidence. the rationale behind the provision giving the appellate court a discretion in the matter of allowing additional evidence at the stage of the appeal is that such evidence was not available at .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 02 1977 (HC)

G. Subramania Mudaliar and ors. Vs. the Ideal Finance Corporation, Par ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-02-1977

Reported in : AIR1977Mad358

..... in the sale would be to the advantage of every one concerned and it would help obtain the highest price for the property under execution. in view of the real rationale behind the rule, it was difficult for me to accept the theoretical basis for the position that an executing court only engages in an administrative exercise when it allows the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 04 1977 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. M.M. Muthiah

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-04-1977

Reported in : [1977]109ITR463(Mad)

ramaprasada rao, j. 1. at the instance of the revenue, the following question of law has been referred to us to give an answer thereto :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, theappellate tribunal was right in holding that the part payment of refund ofannuity deposit in the sum of rs. 1,509 referable to the assessment year1967-68 was not an income liable to tax within the meaning of section 2(24)(viii) of the income-tax act, 1961, in the hands of each of theassessees ?' 2. two appeals were disposed of by the income-tax appellate tribunal, madras, in which the appellant was shri m. m. muthiah, as father and guardian of the minors, and the respondent in the present reference is also shri m. m. muthiah, as father and guardian of the two minors. a common question arose in both the appeals. hence the two applications filed by the commissioner of income-tax, madras-ii, under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'), were consolidated.3. shri murugappa chettiar paid a sum of rs. 2,000 on october 29, 1964, as annuity deposit referable to the assessment year 1964-65. another sum of rs. 11,070 under the same head was paid on march 2, 1965, in respect of the assessment year 1965-66. he nominated two minors, m. m. murugappan and m. m. venkatachalam, jointly as his nominees to receive the refunds, in case he dies which nomination he could do under the provisions of the annuity deposit scheme of 1964. on the death of murugappa .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 15 1977 (HC)

Kanmal Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-15-1977

Reported in : 1978CriLJ867

ordergokulakrishnan, j.1. this petition has been filed by the brother of the detenu to issue a writ of habeas corpus or any other appropriate writ and direct the production of the body of d. gaverchand before this court, now detained in the central prison, madras, by virtue of the order of detention passed by the first respondent in go ms no. s/1 863/1/75 public s. c. department dated 7-5-1975, and for directing the said detenu to be set at liberty forthwith. the case of the petitioner is that the detenu is his brother, who was having a textile business at no. 4/13 kasi chetti st, madras under the name and style of ambika fancy stores. in april 1974, the detenu went to his native place in rajasthan and thereby he incurred loss in his business also. on 23-6-1977, the detenu was arrested at rajasthan and was brought to madras on 6-7-1977 and detained in the central prison, madras. he was served with a detention order on 7-7-1977 and the grounds of detention were served on him on 8-7-1977.2. the detenu was detained by the government of madras, by an order passed in g.o. no. s/1863/1/75 public sc department d/- 7-5-1975. the order reads that the detenu has been detained under section 3 (1) of the conservation of foreign exchange and prevention of smuggling activities act, 1974, owing to the fact that the said detenu was dealing in smuggled goods otherwise than by engaging in transporting smuggled goods. in the grounds of detention, the government has enumerated two instances. one .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 07 1977 (HC)

In Re: Srinivasan

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-07-1977

Reported in : 1977CriLJ2040

orderratnavel pandian, j.1. the petitioner, the accused in c. c. 21 of 1974 on the file of the special judicial second class magistrate, tiruchirapalli, has preferred this revision petition challenging the propriety and legality of the judgment passed by the learned chief judicial magistrate, tiruchirapalli in c. a. 104 of 1974 on his file, confirming the conviction under section 65 of the madras city police act and the sentence to pay a fine of rs. 50/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one week, passed by the trial magistrate.2. the crux of the indictment as per the prosecution case is that the petitioner on 18-4-1974 at 9 a. m. was found to have been in possession of 19 brass plates weighing 57 kilograms, all worth rupees 1,500/-, suspected to have been stolen or fraudulently obtained and for possession of which he had failed to satisfactorily account. the prosecution examined two witnesses besides marking ex. p-1, mahazar dated 18-4-1974, and the material objects m. os. 1 to 3. p. w. 1, the inspector of police, tiruverumbur, has deposed that the petitioner, on being inquired, produced one gunny bag (m. o. 3) containing one square-sized brass plate (m. o. 1) and 18 round-sized brass plates (m. o. 2 series), all weighing 57 kilograms. according to him, the petitioner, when inquired, stated that these plates were entrusted to him for safe custody by one dharman, son of chinnaswami nadar, and one murugesan. as p. w. 1 suspected that these properties should have .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 20 1977 (HC)

Sri Sai Baba and ors. Vs. M.L. Hanumantha Rao

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jul-20-1977

Reported in : (1980)2MLJ518

g. ramanujam, j.1. since some of the issues involved in both the suits are the same, there has been a joint trial by consent of all the parties and they are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. c.s. no. 126 of 1972 : this suit has been filed by four plaintiffs, viz., (1) the deity, sri sai baba, (2) sri sathya sai mandali, represented by its trustees, (3) m. l. sampathkumar, and (4) ml. ramakrishnan, for : (i) delivery of vacant possession of certain portions of premises no. 13. veeraraghava mudali street, alias big street, triplicane, madras-5, hereinafter referred to as the suit house, from defendants 1 to 6 and defendants 7 to 10 or their tenants; (ii) for payment of mesne profits in a sum of rs. 18,000 for a period of three years prior to the suit; and (iii) for payment of future mesne profits at the same rate from the date of suit till date of delivery of possession.3. plaintiffs 3 and 4 and defendants 1 and 2 are the sons of one, m. j loganatha mudaliar. the 7th defendant is the son of the 1st defendant, 8th defendant is the son of the 7th defendant. defendants 9 and 10 are the sons of the 2nd defendant. the 3rd defendant is the maternal uncle of defendants 1 and 2 and plaintiffs 3 and 4. defendants 4 to 6 are tenants in possession of some of the portions in the suit house.4. the plaintiff's case is that the 1st plaintiff is the family deity of m. j. loganatha mudaliar and his children, the same having been consecrated and dedicated on 3rd february, 1949 in sat .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 12 1977 (HC)

K.S. Ramaswamy and Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-12-1977

Reported in : (1977)ILLJ211Mad

ordermohan, j.1. this writ petition is for declaration declaring the life insurance corporation -development officers (alteration of remunerations and other terms and conditions of service) order, 197f, dated 8-4-1976 and the consequential life insurance corporation of india (staff) amendment regulations, 1976, dated 22-4-1976 as ultra vres of section 11(1)(2) and section 49 of the life insurance corporation act, 1956 and also as violative of the petitioner's fundamental rights guaranteed under article 16 of the constitution of india, in so far as it affects the petitioner.2. on 1-12-1955 the petitioner joined the service of the united india life assurance company, which was carrying on life insurance business as an organiser. under the terms and conditions of the services of the company, he was a whole time employee. his functions as organiser were to recruit, guide and supervise the insurance agents who were appointed by the company on his recommendations and to see that maximum possible business is canvassed for the company through the agents.3. on 1-9-1956, parliament enacted the life insurance corporation act (hereinafter referred to as the act). under section 11 of the act, every whole time employee of an insurer (which was a company carrying on life insurance business in india) whose controlled business has been transferred and vested in the corporation and who is employed by the insurer mainly in connection with his business immediately before the appointed day, shall .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 28 1977 (HC)

Doraiswami Vs. Rathnammal and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-28-1977

Reported in : AIR1978Mad78; (1978)1MLJ456

1. this appeal is directed against the judgment of n. s. ramaswami j. in a. s. no. 435 of 1969 confirming the decision of the sub court, coimbatore in o. s. no. 345 of 1964.2. the suit o. s. no. 345 of 1964 has been filed by one rathnammal, the first respondent herein, for partition and separate possession of her l/5th share in the suit properties consisting of a house in coimbetore and certain lands in peria godiveri village in gobichettipalayam taluk. the plaintiff and defendants 2 to 4 are the children of the first defendant through his wife annammal who died in december 1952. the suit properties belonged to annammal. on the ground that annammal died interstate the plaintiff has claimed her one-fifth share in the suit properties. the fourth defendant who is another daughter of annammal also claimed her one-fifth share by paying the necessary court-fee on her written statement. during the pendency of the suit the first defendant died. thereafter the plaintiff and the fourth defendant each claimed one-fourth, share,3. defendants 2 and 3 who are the sons of annamal had set up a will dated 15-2-1952, as the last will and testament left by annammal. under that will annammal's two daughters, namely, the plaintiff and the fourth defendant got only a sum of rs. 1,000 each and all the other properties are to be taken by defendants 2 and 3 with a life interest to the first defendant. the plaintiff has questioned the validity, truth and genuineness of the said will and her specific .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 02 1977 (HC)

Additional Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Madras Cements Ltd.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-02-1977

Reported in : [1977]110ITR281(Mad)

sethuraman, j.1. at the instance of the additional commissioner of income-tax, madras, the income-tax appellate tribunal, madras bench, had referred the following question for the opinion of this court in t.c. no. 376 of 1974:' whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellate tribunal was right in holding that the special reinforced foundation constructed at a cost of rs. 2,68,584 constitutes an item of plant and machinery and not a building and the depreciation and the development rebate should be allowed thereon on such basis '2. the question referred to in t.c. no. 423 of 1974 runs as follows:' whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, it has been rightly held that the special reinforced foundation constructed at a cost of rs. 8,21,617 would constitute an item of plant and machinery and, therefore, would be entitled to depreciation and development rebate '3. the assessments to which these two references relate were made for the assessment years 1962-63 and 1965-66. the assessee-company carries on business in the manufacture and sale of cement. the rotary kiln which forms part of the production machinery was supported on a specially reinforced foundation, the cost of which worked out to rs. 2,68,584 for the assessment year 1962-63. there were further expansions to the said structure as a result of which the special reinforced foundation cost rs. 8,21,617 in relation to the assessment year 1965-66. the foundation was treated as part .....

Tag this Judgment!


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