-
In order to raise the presumption under s.4(1) of the prevention of Corruption Act what the prosecution has to prove is that the accused person has received 'gratification other than legal remuneration' and when it is shown that he has received a certain sum of money which was not a legal remuneration, then, the condition prescribed by the section is satisfied and the presumption thereunder must be raised. To raise the presumption it is not necessary to show that the receipt of the gratifi...
-
The appellant applied for a post advertised by the Madras Public Service Commission, making certain representations in his application which were found to be false. He was convicted under s. 419 Indian Penal Code for having cheated the commission. This conviction was confirmed by the Sessions Judge and the revision was dismissed by the High Court. Held: (i) Cheating can be committed in either of the two ways described in s. 415 Indian Penal Code. 'Deceiving a person' is common in both...
-
Case Law
Recurso nº 1554, Ponente Ramaswami
The appellants filed a suit for partition claiming their share in certain properties of the Venkatagiri Estate which did not vest in the State by virtue of the Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 and in the alternative for maintenance in terms of an agreement entered into in 1899. Their contention was that the Venkatagiri Estate became an impartible estate only under the agreement entered into in 1889 and became a statutory impartible estate by virtue of its...
-
The appellants were charged before the Presidency Magistrate for offences under the Madras Prohibition Act, 1937 and when the cases were taken up for trial they raised the contentions that SS. 4(2) and 28 to 32 of the Act are void under S. 107(I) of the Government of India Act, 1935, because they are repugnant to the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, and also because they are repugnant to Art. 14 Of the Constitution of India. On their ...
-
Case Law
Recurso nº 3758, Ponente Subbarao
Each of the appellants in the two appeals who were tenants of land in Tanjore on which non-residential premises had been constructed by them, applied to the Munsif under s. 9 of the Madras City Tenants Protection Act, 1921 (111 of 1922) to have the respective sites conveyed to them after fixing the sale price as contemplated by the Act. Pending the decision of he applications by the Munsif, the protection and rights given to the tenants who had constructed buildings on leased and by th...
-
Case Law
K. R. Chinna Krishna Chettiar VS. Sri Ambal & Co., Madras & Anr.
Recurso nº 1755, Ponente Bachawat
The appellant was the sole proprietor of a concern known as Radha & Co. The respondents Ambal & Co. were a partnership concern. The respondents as also the appellant were manufacturers and dealers in snuff, carrying on business at Madras and having business activities inside and outside the State of Madras. In 1958 the appellant sought registration of a trade mark consisting of a label with a picture of the goddess Sri Andal and the legand 'Sri Andal' in the central panel, and the words '...
-
The appellant and the fourth respondent along with others were applicants for a stage carriage permit. The Regional Transport Authority after hearing the applicants granted the permit to the appellant. On appeal by the fourth respondent the Central Road Traffic Board set aside the order of the Regional Transport Authority and granted the permit to the fourth respondent. The appellant moved the State Government in revision but to no effect. He thereafter moved the High Court under Art. 226 ...
-
Case Law
Krishna Coconut Co. & Anr. VS. East Godavari Coconut & Tobacco Marketcommittee
Recurso nº 2532, Ponente Shelat
By a notification in June 1949, the State Government, in exercise of a power under s. 2(1)(a) of the Madras Commerical Crops Market Act, 1933, declared coconuts and copra to be 'commercial crops' within the meaning of the Act. The respondent Market Committee IL-vied in respect of the declared commerical crops, a fee on the goods 'bought and sold' within the notified area under s. 11(1) of the Act, read with Rule 28(1) of the Rules made under the Act. The appellants filed various suits c...
-
The appellant, who was working as a Loco Foreman, was found to have accepted a sum of Rs. 375 from a Railway Contractor. The appellant's explanation was that he had borrowed the amount as he was in need of money for meeting the expenses of the clothing of his children who were studying in school, The Special judge accepted the evidence of the contractor and held that the money had been taken as a bribe, that the defence story was improbable and untrue, that the presumption under s. 4 ...
-
The appellant, carrying on business as a manufacturer of jute goods with its factory at Guntur, used to send jute bags by railway to the cement factories of the A.C.C. outside the State of Andhra. For securing a regular supply of jute bags, the A.C.C. entered into a contract with the appellant and under the despatch instructions from that company, the appellant loaded the goods in the railway wagons, obtained railway receipts in the name of the A.C.C. as consignee and against payment of t...
See more references to “a s krishna vs state of madras”
Refine search
Search within 102 Search results “a s krishna vs state of madras”